We performed a comparison between IBM MQ and PubSub+ Event Broker 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 scalability of IBM MQ is good."
"Overall the solution operates well and has good integration."
"We have implemented business to business transactions over MQ messaging. The guaranteed and once only delivery ensures business integrity."
"Assists with our apps and has great message processing."
"I haven't seen any severe issues related to it. Most of the time it's running. That is the advantage of IBM MQ."
"Secure, safe, and very fast."
"The solution can scale well."
"IBM MQ is robust compared to other products in the market. It also gives you support from the IBM team."
"We've built a lot of products into it and it's been quite easy to feed market data onto the systems and put entitlements and controls around that. That was a big win for us when we were consolidating our platforms down. Trying to have one event bus, one messaging bus, for the whole globe, and consolidate everything over time, has been key for us. We've been able to do that through one API, even if it's across the different languages."
"We like the seamless flexibility in protocol exchange offering without writing a code."
"One of the main reasons for using PubSub+ is that it is a proper event manager that can handle events in a reactive way."
"The most valuable feature of PubSub+ Event Broker is the scaling integration. Prior to using the solution, it was done manually with a file, and it can be done instantly live."
"Going from something where we had outages and capacity issues constantly to a system that was able to scale with the massive market data and messaging spikes that happened during the initial stages of the COVID crisis in March, we were able to scale with 40 plus percent growth in our platform over the course of days."
"This solution reduces the latency to access changes in real-time and the effort required to onboard a new subscriber. It also reduces the maintenance of each of those interfaces because now the publisher and subscribers are decoupled. Event Broker handles all the communication and engagement. We can just push one update, then we don't have to know who is consuming it and what's happening to that publication downstream. It's all done by the broker, which is a huge benefit of using Event Broker."
"When we went to add another installation in our private cloud, it was easy. We received support from Solace and the install was seamless with no issues."
"The most useful features has been the WAN optimization and probably the HybridEdge, which requires some third-party adapters or plugins. The idea that we can position Solace as a protocol-agnostic message transport fabric is key to our company having all manners of asynchronous messaging protocols from MQ, Kafka, JMS, etc. I really like the WAN optimization: Send once over a WAN, then distribute locally as many times as there are subscribers."
"The solution should offer a freeware version, free vouchers, or certifications for learning purposes and building knowledge base."
"The scalability is the one area where IBM has fallen behind. As much as it is used, there is a limit to the number of people who are skilled in MQ. That is definitely an issue. Places have kept their MQ-skilled people and other places have really struggled to get MQ skills. It's not a widely-known skillset."
"It would be nice if we could use the cluster facilities because we are doing active/passive configuration use."
"We need to have a better administration console and better monitoring features. Right now, they are not good and could be a lot better."
"IBM MQ's pricing is higher than its competitors'."
"There are many complications with IBM MQ servers."
"It could always be more stable and secure."
"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."
"A challenge we currently have is Solace's ability to integrate with single sign-on in our Active Directory and other single sign-on tools and platforms that any company would have. It's important for the platforms to work. Typically, they support only LDAP-based connectivity to our SQL Servers."
"The product should allow third-party agents to be installed. Currently, it is quite proprietary."
"The licensing and the cost are the major pitfalls."
"If you create one event in the past, you cannot resend it."
"The integrations could improve in PubSub+ Event Broker."
"Some of the feature's gaps with some of the open-source vendors have been closed in a lot of ways. Being more agile and addressing those earlier could be an area for improvement."
"It could be cheaper. It could also have easier usage. It is a brilliant product, but it is quite complex to use."
"The deployment process is complex."
IBM MQ is ranked 2nd in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 156 reviews while PubSub+ Event Broker is ranked 6th in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 15 reviews. IBM MQ is rated 8.4, while PubSub+ Event Broker is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of IBM MQ writes "Reliable and stable solution that includes support from the IBM technical team". On the other hand, the top reviewer of PubSub+ Event Broker writes "Event life cycle management changes the way a designer or architect will design a topic and discover what is available". IBM MQ is most compared with Apache Kafka, ActiveMQ, VMware RabbitMQ, Amazon SQS and Amazon MQ, whereas PubSub+ Event Broker is most compared with Apache Kafka, VMware RabbitMQ, ActiveMQ, Confluent and Amazon EventBridge. See our IBM MQ vs. PubSub+ Event Broker report.
See our list of best Message Queue (MQ) Software 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.