Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Avada Software Infrared360 vs IBM MQ comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

Avada Software Infrared360
Ranking in Business Activity Monitoring
5th
Ranking in Message Oriented Middleware (MOM)
11th
Average Rating
8.8
Number of Reviews
13
Ranking in other categories
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability (75th), Server Monitoring (33rd)
IBM MQ
Ranking in Business Activity Monitoring
1st
Ranking in Message Oriented Middleware (MOM)
1st
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
162
Ranking in other categories
Message Queue (MQ) Software (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Business Activity Monitoring category, the mindshare of Avada Software Infrared360 is 8.0%, up from 6.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM MQ is 40.0%, down from 43.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Business Activity Monitoring
 

Featured Reviews

it_user685326 - PeerSpot reviewer
An offsite team performs a daily infrastructure health check and sends reports to the technical/management teams.
Administration, Monitoring, and Delegation are the most valuable features of the solution. * Administration: It provides a centralized audit trail of all the infrastructure changes. * Monitoring: It gives the ability to integrate with my company's global notification system, and the ability to proactively automate corrective actions. * Delegation: It allows non-technical users to inspect their individual components within the total infrastructure without disturbing other components and without bothering the technical teams.
SelvaKumar4 - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers the ability to batch metadata transfers between systems that support MQ as the communication method
We find it scalable for internal applications, but not so much for external integrations. It should support a wider range of protocols, not just a few specific ones. Many other products have broader protocol support, and IBM MQ is lagging in that area. IBM MQ needs to improve the UI for quicker logging. Users should also have a lot more control over logging, with a dashboard-like interface. That's something they should definitely work on.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The administration piece makes it very easy to do MQ administration. It gives us a lot more flexibility and capabilities."
"It has role-based access to queues, giving us more insights into problems."
"We have easily created use case testing harnesses for specific flows that incorporate various message types."
"It's what we use for monitoring our MQ system, so the features that they provide are just really, really good."
"Monitoring that ties into our incident management system"
"It allows non-technical users to inspect their individual components within the total infrastructure without disturbing other components and without bothering the technical teams."
"A stable and reliable software that offers good integration between different systems."
"The message queue and the integration with any development platform/language, i.e., NET and Java, are the most valuable features."
"The most valuable features are the point to point messaging and the MQ API."
"Currently, we are not using many advanced features. We are only using point-to-point MQ. I have previously used features like context-based authentication, SSL authentication, and high availability. These are good and pretty cool features. They make your business reliable. For critical business needs, everyone uses only IBM MQ. It is the first choice because of its reliability. There is a one-send-and-one-delivery feature. It also has a no-message-loss feature, and because of that, only IBM MQ is used in banking or financial sectors."
"There is no dependency on the end party service's run status."
"There are a lot of extensible options for security, i.e., various things you can do. It's pretty easy to navigate."
"The thing that I like about MQ most is its reliability. It's one of those types of products that just works. You don't have to tinker around with it too much."
"It is very robust and very scalable."
 

Cons

"We are still working with the FTE/MFT subscription monitoring and reporting functionality. That is an area in which we would like to see further development taking place."
"One area where they could improve is with their documentation. Some sections are not up to date with new release information and providing additional samples in some areas would be very helpful."
"The UI can be cumbersome - but we are still using the Viper interface and we have not had the time to check out the Alloy interface which is supposed to be much improved."
"Some of the graphics in the interface could be improved. It's pretty basic. Some interfaces are not up to what you're used to seeing on other, more Windows-like tools."
"The user interface could be sexier and more ergonomic. The competing products have similar problems."
"We desire a dashboard that could accumulate BOQ lengths per tenant on one screen for all tenants."
"We need to have a better administration console and better monitoring features. Right now, they are not good and could be a lot better."
"The memory management is very poor and it consumes too much memory."
"It needs a User Interface which is better than the aging MQ Explorer. The existing solution MQ Explorer is outdated."
"Sometimes, not all messages are consumed in the queues. File transfers need improvement."
"The initial setup is difficult. Creating your own cluster is difficult. Working with cluster repositories is difficult. Issue management with IBM MQ is difficult."
"The worst part is the monitoring or admin, especially in the ACE or Broker. There is always a problem of transparency. In MQ you can observe any process and you know exactly what's going on behind the scenes, but with the ACE or Broker, it's a problem monitoring the HTTP inputs. It's like a black box."
"IBM MQ is not very user-friendly."
"The main issue we are having with the solution is due to the connection dropouts which have been going on for a long time now."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Avada Software's licensing metric is very good because the license fees are based on the number of connections (which have not increased for us very much over the years) rather than the CPU processing power (which increases significantly whenever our hardware is upgraded) or the number of users (which has increased for us a lot since our original purchase)."
"Start small, then increase licensing later as per your demand."
"Our internal budget calculation model incorporates the pricing per endpoint for any new projects. However, as our footprint for distributed queue managers shrinks as part of our shared middleware hub deployment, the initial licensing and support costs have been reduced over the last five years."
"Because the licensing is at the QMGR level, you need to have at least a small cushion of licenses for occasional enterprise needs."
"99.999 percent availability for less than a penny per message over the past 25 years. IBM MQ is the cheapest software in the IBM software portfolio, and it is one of the best."
"The license for IBM MQ is commercial and not cheap. You get a multi-platform solution, which is important because it lets you connect systems on mainframes, personal solutions, Unix, Linux, etc."
"I think the pricing is reasonable, especially with IIB as a part of it."
"It is a licensed product. As compared to an open-source solution, such as RabbitMQ, it is obviously costly. If you're using IBM Message Broker, which is a licensed product, IBM MQ is included in the same license. You don't have to pay separately for IBM MQ. The license cost of IBM MQ is lesser than IBM Message Broker."
"This solution requires a license and we have purchased an enterprise license."
"The price of the solution could be reduced, and we are on an annual subscription."
"You have to license per application installation and if you expand vertically or horizontally, you will be paying for more licenses. The licenses are approximately $10,000 to $15,000 a license, it can get expensive quite quickly."
"It's super expensive, so ask them if they can consolidate some other licensing costs. But, IBM is IBM, so I guess we'll pay for it."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Business Activity Monitoring solutions are best for your needs.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
39%
Insurance Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Computer Software Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
38%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Government
4%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is MQ software?
Hi As someone with 45+ years of experience in the Transaction and Message Processing world, I have seen many "MQ" solutions that have come into the market place. From my perspective, while each pro...
What are the differences between Apache Kafka and IBM MQ?
Apache Kafka is open source and can be used for free. It has very good log management and has a way to store the data used for analytics. Apache Kafka is very good if you have a high number of user...
How does IBM MQ compare with VMware RabbitMQ?
IBM MQ has a great reputation behind it, and this solution is very robust with great stability. It is easy to use, simple to configure and integrates well with our enterprise ecosystem and protocol...
 

Comparisons

No data available
 

Also Known As

Infrared360
WebSphere MQ
 

Learn More

Video not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

USBank, Southwest Airlines, Visiting Nurse Services of New York, Aon Hewitt, Parker Hannifin,  Cantonal Bank of Zurich (ZKB), Hagemeyer NA, and many others
Deutsche Bahn, Bon-Ton, WestJet, ARBURG, Northern Territory Government, Tata Steel Europe, Sharp Corporation
Find out what your peers are saying about Avada Software Infrared360 vs. IBM MQ and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.