IBM MQ and Amazon SQS compete in the enterprise messaging category, with IBM MQ excelling in handling complex, high-volume integrations across diverse environments and Amazon SQS shining in simplicity and integration with AWS services. IBM MQ appears superior for enterprise-grade messaging with robust features for scalability and data integrity, whereas Amazon SQS stands out for cost-effectiveness and ease of use.
Features: IBM MQ is known for transferring large volumes of data reliably, with features including queue managers, asynchronous messaging, and a comprehensive command-line interface, supporting diverse environments without message loss. Amazon SQS is integrated deeply with AWS, offering FIFO and dead-letter queues, along with robust event-driven invocation, making it cost-effective for scalable messaging within AWS.
Room for Improvement: IBM MQ may need better integration with newer technologies like Kafka, enhanced monitoring, high availability, and a more user-friendly GUI, with pricing posing a challenge. Amazon SQS could improve message size limitations, expand protocol support, and manage costs better, enhancing its integration to compete with platforms like Kafka.
Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: IBM MQ offers flexible deployment across on-premises, hybrid, and private clouds, though support quality can vary. Amazon SQS benefits from AWS infrastructure's quick deployment and scaling, being recognized for ease of use but with concerns about cost management as usage scales.
Pricing and ROI: IBM MQ is considered expensive, with licensing as a barrier for smaller companies, yet its long-term enterprise value is noted. Amazon SQS utilizes a competitive, pay-as-you-use model, appealing to cost-conscious users but requiring careful cost management as usage grows, both being reliable solutions with different cost strategies.
Using Amazon SQS has led to increased productivity and reduced man-hour costs.
It's a product which integrates the external systems with internal systems or among the systems themselves, making it an essential technology component required to integrate multiple systems.
They meet their tasks effectively.
We cannot hold on to the project for a long time just to wait for IBM to fix the issues.
The response time for IBM MQ support could be better because when we are using IBM MQ and something goes wrong, support is required as the resource availability of the IBM product is very limited.
With containerized flavors of these products, we are having a tough time dealing with PMRs because the versions are new to IBM.
Amazon SQS is highly scalable, automatically managing itself based on the load.
I can easily scale up or down with Amazon SQS without any issues.
IBM MQ handles many thousands of messages in a second, indicating good scalability.
In our environment, we do not have horizontal scaling for IBM MQ, but as demand increases, we would just vertically scale it.
We've got 12 VMs running, and it's very easy to scale.
With Amazon SQS, such maintenance is not needed, making it more reliable and secure.
The stability of Amazon SQS is very good, as I find it to be very stable.
We have never had any downtime or crashes since it's been running.
The transaction is always guaranteed with IBM MQ, which is the main reason I have been working with it for fifteen years while dealing with financial transactions or messages.
Otherwise, they're completely stable.
It would be beneficial if there was a provision to configure and retain messages for longer than a week.
Having a graphical user interface would improve usability.
The pricing model for IBM MQ could be more flexible for clients.
They don't meet our standards due to the timing to get a person with knowledge.
On a scale of one to ten, where one is very cheap, I would rate the pricing as one.
It's not cheap.
It's possible to get some training, but the cost of this learning is expensive.
The price of IBM MQ is definitely on the higher side.
If there's a failure in the system after consuming a message, SQS's settings ensure the message is not deleted until confirmation.
If we compare with other solutions such as RabbitMQ for messaging, Amazon SQS is easier to use and easier to create the queue.
These are financial transactions, so we do not want to lose the message at any cost.
There is a saying that for the last 30 years IBM MQ has never been hacked.
It's time-tested, very stable, highly resilient, and has all the features to troubleshoot even if something goes wrong.
| Product | Market Share (%) |
|---|---|
| IBM MQ | 22.5% |
| Amazon SQS | 7.8% |
| Other | 69.7% |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 13 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 4 |
| Large Enterprise | 14 |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 20 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 18 |
| Large Enterprise | 147 |
Amazon Simple Queue Service (SQS) is a fully managed message queuing service that enables you to decouple and scale microservices, distributed systems, and serverless applications. SQS eliminates the complexity and overhead associated with managing and operating message oriented middleware, and empowers developers to focus on differentiating work. Using SQS, you can send, store, and receive messages between software components at any volume, without losing messages or requiring other services to be available. Get started with SQS in minutes using the AWS console, Command Line Interface or SDK of your choice, and three simple commands.
SQS offers two types of message queues. Standard queues offer maximum throughput, best-effort ordering, and at-least-once delivery. SQS FIFO queues are designed to guarantee that messages are processed exactly once, in the exact order that they are sent.
IBM MQ is a middleware product used to send or exchange messages across multiple platforms, including applications, systems, files, and services via MQs (messaging queues). This solution helps simplify the creation of business applications, and also makes them easier to maintain. IBM MQ is security-rich, has high performance, and provides a universal messaging backbone with robust connectivity. In addition, it also integrates easily with existing IT assets by using an SOA (service oriented architecture).
IBM MQ can be deployed:
IBM MQ supports the following APIs:
IBM MQ Features
Some of the most powerful IBM MQ features include:
IBM MQ Benefits
Some of the benefits of using IBM MQ include:
Reviews from Real Users
Below are some reviews and helpful feedback written by IBM MQ users who are currently using the solution.
PeerSpot user Sunil S., a manager at a financial services firm, explains that they never lose messages are never lost in transit, mentioning that he can store messages and forward them as required: "Whenever payments are happening, such as incoming payments to the bank, we need to notify the customer. With MQ we can actually do that asynchronously. We don't want to notify the customer for each and every payment but, rather, more like once a day. That kind of thing can be enabled with the help of MQ."
Another PeerSpot reviewer, Luis L. who is a solutions director at Thesys Technologies, says that IBM MQ is a valuable solution and is "A stable and reliable software that offers good integration between different systems."
The head of operations at a financial services firm notes that "I have found the solution to be very robust. It has a strong reputation, is easy to use, simple to configure in our enterprise software, and supports all the protocols that we use."
In addition, a Software Engineer at a financial services firm praises the security benefits of it and states that “it has the most security features I've seen in a communication solution. Security is the most important thing for our purposes."
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.
