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."The libraries that connect and manage the queues are rich in features."
"SQS is very stable, and it has lots of features."
"We use the tool in interface integrations."
"There is no setup just some easy configuration required."
"With SQS, we can trigger events in various cloud environments. It offers numerous benefits for us."
"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."
"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."
"I am able to find out what's going on very easily."
"The methodology and the way in which the platform has been produced as a standard is most valuable. There are so many different versions of it now, but the actual basic functionality and the simplicity of it have made it far easier to be implemented in so many different instances. When I worked with the OS/2 or PS/2 machine environment, the messaging mechanisms were based upon IBM MQ. It is so versatile, which is the main reason that I'm a fan of it."
"The solution allows one to easily configure an IBM MQQueueManager."
"The scalability of IBM MQ is good."
"The solution is very stable."
"The product helps us monitor messages with other queues, view duplicated messages and control undelivered messages."
"IBM MQ is robust compared to other products in the market. It also gives you support from the IBM team."
"The system integration is good."
"It's ability to scale, it's ability to do guaranteed delivery and it's ability to do point-to-point of what we subscribe are the most valuable features."
"Be cautious around pay-as-you-use licensing as costs can become expensive."
"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."
"I cannot send a message to multiple people simultaneously. It can only be sent to one recipient."
"Support could be improved."
"Sending or receiving messages takes some time, and it could be quicker."
"The current visibility timeout of five minutes is okay. However, I'd like to explore the possibility of extending it for specific use cases."
"There are some issues with SQS's transaction queue regarding knowing if something has been received."
"The issue is that they're using a very old clustering model."
"We need to have a better administration console and better monitoring features. Right now, they are not good and could be a lot better."
"They probably need to virtualize the MQ flow and allow us to design the MQ flow using the UI. It would also help to migrate to the cloud easily and implement AWS Lambda functions with minimum coding. If you have to code, then just with NodeJS or Java."
"The solution should offer a freeware version, free vouchers, or certifications for learning purposes and building knowledge base."
"IBM MQ's pricing is higher than its competitors'."
"I have used the support from IBM MQ. There is some room for improvement."
"The solution requires a lot of work to implement and maintain."
"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."
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 Apache Kafka, Redis, 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 Anypoint 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.
