"The solution can scale well."
"I like the architecture it provides seamlessly for assured delivery."
"Currently, we are not using many advanced features. We are only using point-to-point MQ. I have previously used features like context-based authentication, SSL authentication, and high availability. These are good and pretty cool features. They make your business reliable. For critical business needs, everyone uses only IBM MQ. It is the first choice because of its reliability. There is a one-send-and-one-delivery feature. It also has a no-message-loss feature, and because of that, only IBM MQ is used in banking or financial sectors."
"The usability of the solution is very good."
"The most valuable feature is the interaction within the system."
"Reliable messaging and throughput are the most valuable."
"This initial setup is not complex at all. Deploying it was very easy."
"The solution is stable."
"TIBCO Rendezvous has a strategy to communicate in the network between the DMO of the product. They provide strategy through secure communication. They use the UDP protocol, but It's not a resilient protocol. They put another protocol to create a type of guarantee. It has a high level of communication between the DMO. This is the best capability the solution has."
"IBM MQ is not very user-friendly."
"The initial setup is difficult. Creating your own cluster is difficult. Working with cluster repositories is difficult. Issue management with IBM MQ is difficult."
"We need to have a better administration console and better monitoring features. Right now, they are not good and could be a lot better."
"The main issue we are having with the solution is due to the connection dropouts which have been going on for a long time now."
"We are looking at the latest version, and we hope that resilience, high availability, and monitoring will be improved. It can have some more improvements in the heterogeneous messaging feature. The current solution is on-premises, so good integration with public cloud messaging solutions would be useful."
"I wanted to upgrade Windows Server. It's not that easy to move."
"With IBM products, there's less marketing. If they do more demos and more seminars on their products, it will be very useful. On a given day. I get seminar invites for many vendors and products, but for IBM, I may get an invite once or twice a year."
"It's hard to put in a nutshell, but it's sort of developed as more of an on-premise solution. It hasn't moved much away from that."
"TIBCO Rendezvous is currently restricted in a cloud environment and it would be more useful in a hybrid cloud setup. It does not work correctly in a cloud environment alone. This is something they can improve in the future."
IBM MQ is ranked 1st in Business Activity Monitoring with 45 reviews while TIBCO Rendezvous is ranked 2nd in Business Activity Monitoring with 1 review. IBM MQ is rated 8.0, while TIBCO Rendezvous is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of IBM MQ writes "We don't lose messages in transit and we can store messages and forward them when required". On the other hand, the top reviewer of TIBCO Rendezvous writes "Good communication, stable, and responsive support". IBM MQ is most compared with Apache Kafka, VMware RabbitMQ, ActiveMQ, PubSub+ Event Broker and Software AG Universal Messaging, whereas TIBCO Rendezvous is most compared with TIBCO FTL, PubSub+ Event Broker and Real-Time Innovations DDS.
See our list of best Business Activity Monitoring vendors and best Message Oriented Middleware (MOM) vendors.
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.
