We performed a comparison between Amazon SNS and IBM MQ based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Message Oriented Middleware (MOM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Stability has been good for us. It is quite high."
"The most valuable feature of Amazon SNS is speed. It's really fast."
"The initial setup of Amazon SNS was easy."
"We have found the key feature of this solution to be the simplicity of sending out notifications."
"Push notifications are the most valuable. I have mostly used push notifications for my system. Amazon SNS supports all devices for push notification services. It supports iOS, Android, and Windows notifications. It provides reliable push notification services. We have queues, and we can track which notifications have failed or had some issues. We can then figure out the issue. We can also debug the issue because of which our push notification didn't reach the end users."
"Amazon SNS has SMS notifications as well. Most of the other solutions have only email notifications."
"The best aspect of this solution is its simplicity. We just have to create topics and can have as many subscriptions as we want under any topic we create."
"Messages easily flow from publisher or application to subscriber."
"It is very robust and very scalable."
"The first things are its simplicity and its robustness. Compared to any other product, it's the most robust I've worked with. And it's extremely easy to manage."
"We use queue managers/concentrators for message flow going upstream and downstream on applications with enterprise licenses."
"IBM MQ is robust compared to other products in the market. It also gives you support from the IBM team."
"Whenever payments are happening, such as incoming payments to the bank, we need to notify the customer. With MQ we can actually do that asynchronously. We don't want to notify the customer for each and every payment but, rather, more like once a day. That kind of thing can be enabled with the help of MQ."
"The most valuable feature of IBM MQ is transaction processing."
"The solution is very easy to work with."
"This initial setup is not complex at all. Deploying it was very easy."
"I expect Amazon SNS to provide some capabilities to allow the configuration process to be done in a single script."
"In future releases, I want to see if the platforms that SMS can reach. It would be a good way to improve it. More platforms to be able to use it."
"We would like the integration with third party applications to be improved within this solution."
"In terms of improvement, I would like to have better customer support for SNS. We can then manage it very easily."
"I recently worked with Firebase, and it provides an option to create a marketing campaign with a title and a specific image to inform our audience about something. We just design the campaign and then use the push notifications. It would be good if Amazon also adds a similar feature."
"We would like to have the option when someone leaves the organization or moves to another team, to remove notifications. Currently this needs to be done manually by the company admin."
"A major issue with AWS as a whole is that it has a lot of services that do the same thing, and people get confused about which one to use in which scenario. Previously, we used to use SNS for connecting microservices. SNS has around six types of subscribers. We can subscribe to Lambda, HTTP, HTTPS, SMS, email, and push notifications. We used to use HTTP endpoints and Lambda for connecting to microservice systems. Now we have something called EventBridge, which actually does that for you. For connecting to services, we should just use EventBridge rather than SQS, SNS. I hear a lot of complaints from people wherein they do not understand when to use EventBridge and when to use SQS, SNS. They can remove these features so that it doesn't confuse users about when to use SQS, SNS, or EventBridge."
"Messages should flow through a gateway without the need for a mediator."
"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 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."
"At a recent conference, I went to a presentation that had the latest version and it has amazing stuff that's coming out. So, I am excited to use those, specifically surrounding the web console and the fact that it's API integrated."
"I would like to see it integrate with the newer ways of messaging, such as Kafka. They might say that you have IBM Integration Bus to do that stuff, but it would be great if MQ could, out-of-the-box, listen to public Kafka."
"There are things within the actual product itself that can be improved, such as limitations on message length, size, etc. There is no standardized message length outside of IBM. Each of the implementations of the MQ series or support of that functionality varies between various suppliers, and because of that, it is very difficult to move from one to the other. We have IBM MQ, but we couldn't use it because the platform that was speaking to MQ didn't support the message length that was standard within IBM MQ. So, we had to use a different product to do exactly the same thing. So, perhaps, there could be more flexibility in the standards around the message queue. If we had been able to increase the message queue size within the IBM MQ implementation, we wouldn't have had to go over to another competing product because the system that was using MQ messaging required the ability to hold messages that were far larger than the IBM MQ standard. So, there could be a bit more flexibility in the structuring. It has as such nothing to do with the IBM implementation of MQ. It is just that the standard that is being put out onto the market doesn't actually stipulate those types of things."
"There are many complications with IBM MQ servers."
"Should have more integration in the monitoring tools."
"The integration capabilities could be even easier."
Amazon SNS is ranked 3rd in Message Oriented Middleware (MOM) with 11 reviews while IBM MQ is ranked 1st in Message Oriented Middleware (MOM) with 158 reviews. Amazon SNS is rated 9.0, while IBM MQ is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Amazon SNS writes "The best service available with easy message flow and a pay-as-you-go model". 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 SNS is most compared with Amazon EventBridge, PubSub+ Event Broker and TIBCO Enterprise Message Service, whereas IBM MQ is most compared with ActiveMQ, Apache Kafka, VMware RabbitMQ, Red Hat AMQ and Amazon SQS. See our Amazon SNS vs. IBM MQ report.
See our list of best Message Oriented Middleware (MOM) vendors.
We monitor all Message Oriented Middleware (MOM) 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.
