We performed a comparison between Amazon SQS and Red Hat JBoss A-MQ for xPaaS based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, IBM, Amazon and others in Message Queue (MQ) Software."There is no setup just some easy configuration required."
"We use the tool in interface integrations."
"SQS is very stable, and it has lots of features."
"The libraries that connect and manage the queues are rich in features."
"One of the useful features is the ability to schedule a call after a certain number of messages accumulate in the container. For example, if there are ten messages in the container, you can perform a specific action."
"It's very quick and easy to build or set up Amazon SQS."
"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."
"With SQS, we can trigger events in various cloud environments. It offers numerous benefits for us."
"JBoss is easy to use, and we have a good partner here in Tunisia to provide local support."
"I cannot send a message to multiple people simultaneously. It can only be sent to one recipient."
"The tool needs improvement in user-friendliness and discoverability."
"There are some issues with SQS's transaction queue regarding knowing if something has been received."
"Be cautious around pay-as-you-use licensing as costs can become expensive."
"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 solution is not available on-premises so that rules out any customers looking for the messaging solution on-premises."
"I do not think that this solution is easy to use and the documentation of this solution has a lot of problems and can be improved in the next release. Most of the time, the images in the document are from older versions."
"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."
"JBoss could add more automation."
Amazon SQS is ranked 4th in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 11 reviews while Red Hat JBoss A-MQ for xPaaS is ranked 12th in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 1 review. Amazon SQS is rated 8.0, while Red Hat JBoss A-MQ for xPaaS is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Amazon SQS writes "Stable, useful interface, and scales well". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat JBoss A-MQ for xPaaS writes "It's scalable and easy to use, and we have local support here in Tunisia". Amazon SQS is most compared with Apache Kafka, Redis, Amazon MQ, IBM MQ and Oracle Event Hub Cloud Service, whereas Red Hat JBoss A-MQ for xPaaS is most compared with IBM MQ and Apache Kafka.
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.