We performed a comparison between Amazon SQS and IBM MQ based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Message Queue (MQ) Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It's very quick and easy to build or set up Amazon SQS."
"One of the useful features is the ability to schedule a call after a certain number of messages accumulate in the container. For example, if there are ten messages in the container, you can perform a specific action."
"The most valuable feature of Amazon SQS is the interface."
"It is stable and scalable."
"The libraries that connect and manage the queues are rich in features."
"We use SNS as the publisher, and our procurement service subscribes to those events using SQS. In the past, we relied on time-based or batch-based processes to send data between services on-premises. With SQS, we can trigger actions based on real-time changes in business processes, improving reliability."
"We use the tool in interface integrations."
"With SQS, we can trigger events in various cloud environments. It offers numerous benefits for us."
"Reliable messaging and throughput are the most valuable."
"We like IBM MQ for our synchronous communications and transactional applications that require a lot of CPS."
"The most valuable feature is that it's a very strong integration platform but it is quite a monolithic solution. It's got everything."
"RabbitMQ and Kafka require more steps for setup than IBM MQ. Installation of the IBM product is very simple."
"I haven't seen any issues with respect to the message loss."
"Reliable integration between MQ servers is the most valuable feature."
"The usability of the solution is very good."
"The most valuable feature of IBM MQ is it has all the features necessary for contemporary messaging, not only for the financial industry but for any application."
"Support could be improved."
"The tool needs improvement in user-friendliness and discoverability."
"The initial setup of Amazon SQS is in the middle range of difficulty. You need to learn Amazon AWS and know how to navigate, create resources, and structures, and provide rules."
"Sometimes, we have to switch to another component similar to SQS because the patching tool for SQS is relatively slow for us."
"There are some issues with SQS's transaction queue regarding knowing if something has been received."
"It would be easier to have a dashboard that allows us to see everything and manage everything since we have so many queues."
"I cannot send a message to multiple people simultaneously. It can only be sent to one recipient."
"As a company that uses IBM solutions, it's difficult to compare Amazon SQS to other solutions. We have been using IBM solutions for a long time and they are very mature in integration and queuing. In my role as an integration manager, I can say that Amazon SQS is designed primarily for use within the Amazon ecosystem and does not have the same level of functionality as IBM MQ or other similar products. It has limited connectivity options and does not easily integrate with legacy systems."
"It's hard to put in a nutshell, but it's sort of developed as more of an on-premise solution. It hasn't moved much away from that."
"The solution should offer a freeware version, free vouchers, or certifications for learning purposes and building knowledge base."
"It would be great if the dashboard had additional features like a board design."
"Everything in the solution could be simplified a little. We have trouble with the configuration and cost which is mostly an internal issue, but nevertheless, the errors do come up when there are configuration changes across a specific version. We have slightly different versions, which may have slightly different configurations which cause issues."
"I would just like a more user-friendly experience to do common administration tasks. I know that you can use MQ Explorer, but having something that's already built in would definitely be useful."
"I wanted to upgrade Windows Server. It's not that easy to move."
"We are looking at the latest version, and we hope that resilience, high availability, and monitoring will be improved. It can have some more improvements in the heterogeneous messaging feature. The current solution is on-premises, so good integration with public cloud messaging solutions would be useful."
"The solution isn't free. There are other solutions, like RabbitMQ, which are open source and absolutely free to use. It's one reason we are moving away from IBM."
Amazon SQS is ranked 5th in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 13 reviews while IBM MQ is ranked 2nd in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 158 reviews. Amazon SQS is rated 8.2, while IBM MQ is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Amazon SQS writes "Stable, useful interface, and scales well". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM MQ writes "Offers the ability to batch metadata transfers between systems that support MQ as the communication method". Amazon SQS is most compared with Redis, Apache Kafka, Amazon MQ, Anypoint MQ and PubSub+ Event Broker, whereas IBM MQ is most compared with ActiveMQ, Apache Kafka, VMware Tanzu Data Services, Red Hat AMQ and Amazon MQ. See our Amazon SQS vs. IBM MQ report.
See our list of best Message Queue (MQ) Software vendors.
We monitor all Message Queue (MQ) Software reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
