Aurea CX Messenger vs. IBM MQ

Aurea CX Messenger is ranked 3rd in Business Activity Monitoring with 3 reviews vs IBM MQ which is ranked 1st in Business Activity Monitoring with 63 reviews. The top reviewer of Aurea CX Messenger writes "User-friendly tool which allows for a seamless approach to performing hotfixes". The top reviewer of IBM MQ writes "I like that the ability to add applications to it is simple". Aurea CX Messenger is most compared with ActiveMQ, Mule ESB and RabbitMQ. IBM MQ is most compared with RabbitMQ, ActiveMQ and Apache Kafka. See our Aurea CX Messenger vs. IBM MQ report.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Aurea CX Messenger Logo
4,306 views|1,942 comparisons
IBM MQ Logo
26,564 views|17,278 comparisons
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Aurea CX Messenger vs. IBM MQ and other solutions.
309,398 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

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

Pros
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.

Read more »

It improves reliability and guarantees that messages are not lost.Reliable integration between MQ servers is the most valuable feature.Data integrity, reliability and security are valuable features that IBM MQ possesses.There is no dependency on the end party service's run status.We use queue managers/concentrators for message flow going upstream and downstream on applications with enterprise licenses.It runs everywhere, from the mainframe in the US to the PCs in the Gobi desert attached to an analog modem.Has helped integrate between applications, reduce rework, and costs by reusing working components of existing applications.Integrates between distributed systems: For example, it can help integrate processing between mainframe, client-server, web-based applications by integrating the messages, supporting Service Oriented Architecture.

Read more »

Cons
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.You should not hurry with upgrades without testing the whole product completely.

Read more »

I believe there is too much code to be done in order to handle the elements that you develop.I believe the stability of the product has decreased since we began using it initially.MQ needs instruments for connection with new modern queues like Kafka or RabbitMQ.SonicMQ CAA (continuous availability architecture) functionality on auto failover and data persistence should be made available without a shared drive, as it exists in multi-instance queue managers.It could get a face lift with a modern marketing campaign.the level of training as well as product marketing for this product are not that great. You rarely find a good training institute that provides training. Many of the architects in several organization are neither aware of the product nor interested in using it. IBM should provide good training on products like this.It needs a User Interface which is better than the aging MQ Explorer. The existing solution MQ Explorer is outdated.The installation of product upgrades and patches is very difficult. It requires the use of the IBM Installation Manager (IM).

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
You pay nothing for licensing, because the commercial model is a subscription. Other environments, such as QA and Development, are included in the subscriptionMuch better than Oracle SOA Suite.

Read more »

To implement such an IBM solution, a company has to pay a lot in term of licensing and consultancy. A pricing model might be a better option.In terms of cost, IBM MQ is slightly on the higher side.IBM MQ appliance has pricing options, but they are costly.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.Pricing could be better, as with all IBM products. But their performance in production, along with security and scalability, will pay returns in the long run.I think the pricing is reasonable, especially with IIB as a part of it.Use the new and lightweight version (Liberty) to lower licensing costs. It is also easier to upgrade/maintain.IBM MQ has a flexible license model based on the Processor Value Unit (PVU) and I recommend it.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Business Activity Monitoring solutions are best for your needs.
309,398 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
Views
4,306
Comparisons
1,942
Reviews
3
Followers
189
Avg. Rating
9.3
Views
26,564
Comparisons
17,278
Reviews
63
Followers
721
Avg. Rating
8.6
Top Comparisons
Compared 23% of the time.
Compared 22% of the time.
Compared 20% of the time.
Compared 37% of the time.
Compared 25% of the time.
Compared 20% of the time.
Also Known As
CX Messenger Enterprise, Aurea Sonic ESB, Aurea Sonic, Aurea Sonic MQWebSphere MQ
Learn
Aurea
IBM
Overview

CX Messenger lets your technology keep pace with your business. Aurea’s industry leading Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) lets you adapt and change your infrastructure with plug-and-play speed and ease.

    IBM MQ provides the universal messaging backbone for service-oriented architecture (SOA) connectivity. It connects virtually any commercial IT system, whether on premise, in the cloud, or a mixture. For more than 20 years IBM has led the market in messaging middleware and more than 10,000 businesses across all geographies and industries rely on IBM MQ.

    Visit for your trial here.

Offer
Learn more about Aurea CX Messenger
Learn more about IBM MQ
Sample Customers
Heathrow, HomeServe, Paypal, Freedom MortgageDeutsche Bahn, Bon-Ton, WestJet, ARBURG, Northern Territory Government, Tata Steel Europe, Sharp Corporation
Top Industries
No Data Available
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm29%
Insurance Company15%
Retailer13%
Healthcare Company8%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Financial Services Firm39%
Insurance Company12%
Engineering Company9%
Transportation Company7%
Company Size
No Data Available
REVIEWERS
Small Business1%
Midsize Enterprise10%
Large Enterprise89%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business12%
Midsize Enterprise4%
Large Enterprise84%
Find out what your peers are saying about Aurea CX Messenger vs. IBM MQ and other solutions.
309,398 professionals have used our research since 2012.
We monitor all Business Activity Monitoring 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.

Sign Up with Email