We performed a comparison between Aurea CX Messenger 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 Messenger Broker is a really good feature."
"The features that I have found most valuable are that it is very easy to develop. Most of it is graphical, but we also have the option to add any custom call that you need."
"SDM: User-friendly tool which allows for a seamless approach to performing hotfixes, if required."
"ESB: Provides all kind of possibilities to resolve business needs. A lot of ready to use services plus custom Java services. I used a lot of them all."
"The solution offers excellent stability."
"The solution is highly scalable, this is very important for us. It can handle a lot of messages."
"RabbitMQ and Kafka require more steps for setup than IBM MQ. Installation of the IBM product is very simple."
"The most valuable feature is the Queue Manager, which lies in the middle between our application and our core banking server."
"IBM MQ's flexibility has sped up our active communication."
"The solution allows one to easily configure an IBM MQQueueManager."
"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."
"We have found the MQ messaging topologies valuable."
"The solution is very stable."
"The most valuable feature is the stability. It's perfect in this way."
"The solution needs to improve support for new, more recent protocols on the API."
"You should not hurry with upgrades without testing the whole product completely."
"I don't know if the last version has the cloud option, but maybe that could be good. That could be something that is included."
"Aurea CX Messenger could improve by making better use of the new APIs"
"It should include/add more services with the product as per market demand. It should include custom Java services developed by any organization or provide a platform where users/developers can share ideas/custom services, etc."
"The improvement is that it should be on the cloud and use web services."
"IBM could revamp the interface. The API is huge, but some developers find it limiting because of the cost. They tend to wrap the API course into the JMS, which means they're missing out on some good features. They should work a little bit on the API exposure."
"More documentation would be good because some features are not deeply implemented."
"I would like the ability to connect with some of the more recent offerings, such as API Connect; being able to publish our MQ endpoints, the queues, the messaging infrastructure as IT assets."
"I wanted to upgrade Windows Server. It's not that easy to move."
"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."
"IBM HQ's scalability isn't the best."
"They could integrate monitoring into the solution, a bit more than they do now. Currently, they have opened the REST API so you can get statistic and accounting information and details from MQ and build your own monitoring, if you want. IBM can improve the solution in this direction."
"The user interface should be enhanced to include more monitoring features and other metrics. The metrics should include not only those from the IBM MQ point of view but also CPU and memory utilization."
Aurea CX Messenger is ranked 10th in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 7 reviews while IBM MQ is ranked 2nd in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 158 reviews. Aurea CX Messenger is rated 9.0, while IBM MQ is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Aurea CX Messenger writes "Lightweight and efficient solution". 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". Aurea CX Messenger is most compared with Apache Kafka, TIBCO Enterprise Message Service, Mule ESB and WSO2 Enterprise Integrator, whereas IBM MQ is most compared with ActiveMQ, Apache Kafka, VMware Tanzu Data Services, Red Hat AMQ and PubSub+ Event Broker. See our Aurea CX Messenger vs. IBM MQ report.
See our list of best Message Queue (MQ) Software vendors, best Business Activity Monitoring vendors, and best Message Oriented Middleware (MOM) 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.