We performed a comparison between Amazon SQS and IBM Event Streams 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."I am able to find out what's going on very easily."
"There is no setup just some easy configuration required."
"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."
"It is stable and scalable."
"The most valuable feature of Amazon SQS is the interface."
"With SQS, we can trigger events in various cloud environments. It offers numerous benefits for us."
"SQS is very stable, and it has lots of features."
"It's very quick and easy to build or set up Amazon SQS."
"The system efficiently processes and calculates the data flow within the cluster using DLP functionality."
"The stability has been good."
"I'm an administrator, and what I like most is the interface, the security, and the storage."
"Support could be improved."
"I cannot send a message to multiple people simultaneously. It can only be sent to one recipient."
"It would be easier to have a dashboard that allows us to see everything and manage everything since we have so many queues."
"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."
"Sometimes, we have to switch to another component similar to SQS because the patching tool for SQS is relatively slow for us."
"Be cautious around pay-as-you-use licensing as costs can become expensive."
"The tool needs improvement in user-friendliness and discoverability."
"The current visibility timeout of five minutes is okay. However, I'd like to explore the possibility of extending it for specific use cases."
"In the next release, I would like to see the GUI allow you to configure the security section."
"It would be helpful if they could help us explain why they, as in, the customers, should use the product and the overall benefits."
"The product's interface needs improvement."
Amazon SQS is ranked 4th in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 13 reviews while IBM Event Streams is ranked 10th in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 3 reviews. Amazon SQS is rated 8.2, while IBM Event Streams 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 Event Streams writes "Easy to use, stable, has a good interface, and the security is good". Amazon SQS is most compared with Apache Kafka, Redis, Amazon MQ, Anypoint MQ and IBM MQ, whereas IBM Event Streams is most compared with Apache Kafka, Red Hat AMQ and IBM MQ. See our Amazon SQS vs. IBM Event Streams 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.
