We performed a comparison between Amazon SQS and Red Hat AMQ 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 most valuable feature of Amazon SQS is the interface."
"There is no setup just some easy configuration required."
"I appreciate that Amazon SQS is fully integrated with Amazon and can be accessed through normal functions or serverless functions, making it very user-friendly. Additionally, the features are comparable to those of other solutions."
"I am able to find out what's going on very easily."
"The libraries that connect and manage the queues are rich in features."
"The most valuable feature is stability."
"The solution is very lightweight, easy to configure, simple to manage, and robust since it launched."
"The most valuable feature for us is the operator-based automation that is provided by Streams for infrastructure as well as user and topic management. This saves a lot of time and effort on our part to provide infrastructure. For example, the deployment of infrastructure is reduced from approximately a week to a day."
"This product is well adopted on the OpenShift platform. For organizations like ours that use OpenShift for many of our products, this is a good feature."
"Be cautious around pay-as-you-use licensing as costs can become expensive."
"The solution is not available on-premises so that rules out any customers looking for the messaging solution on-premises."
"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."
"The initial setup of Amazon SQS is in the middle range of difficulty. You need to learn Amazon AWS and know how to navigate, create resources, and structures, and provide rules."
"It would be easier to have a dashboard that allows us to see everything and manage everything since we have so many queues."
"There are some aspects of the monitoring that could be improved on. There is a tool that is somewhat connected to Kafka called Service Registry. This is a product by Red Hat that I would like to see integrated more tightly."
"There is improvement needed to keep the support libraries updated."
"This product needs better visualization capabilities in general."
"The turnaround of adopting new versions of underlying technologies sometimes is too slow."
Amazon SQS is ranked 3rd in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 5 reviews while Red Hat AMQ is ranked 7th in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 4 reviews. Amazon SQS is rated 7.8, while Red Hat AMQ is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Amazon SQS writes "Very resilient with numerous great features including a 256 kilobyte payload". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat AMQ writes "Flexible, cost-effective, good compatibility with the OpenShift platform, effective and timely support". Amazon SQS is most compared with Apache Kafka, Amazon MQ, Oracle Event Hub Cloud Service and IBM MQ, whereas Red Hat AMQ is most compared with Apache Kafka, ActiveMQ, IBM MQ, VMware RabbitMQ and PubSub+ Event Broker. See our Amazon SQS vs. Red Hat AMQ 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.
