We compared IBM MQ and VMware RabbitMQ based on our user's reviews in several parameters.
IBM MQ is praised for its reliability, scalability, security, and seamless integration capabilities, with positive feedback on customer service, setup expenses, and licensing. On the other hand, VMware RabbitMQ is commended for its message queueing abilities, integration, scalability, and support. Areas for enhancement in IBM MQ include improvements in certain aspects, while VMware RabbitMQ users seek better documentation, UI, stability, performance, error handling, message routing, and clustering support.
Features: IBM MQ is valued for its reliability, scalability, security, and ease of integration. Users appreciate its ability to handle high volumes of messages without loss or delay and its robust encryption protocols. It seamlessly connects with different applications and platforms. On the other hand, VMware RabbitMQ excels in message queueing capabilities, seamless integration, scalability, and community support.
Pricing and ROI: The setup cost for IBM MQ received positive remarks, with users finding it reasonable and cost-effective. The setup costs were considered manageable, allowing swift implementation. In comparison, users expressed satisfaction with the affordable setup cost of VMware RabbitMQ and its flexible licensing options., IBM MQ users have praised its efficiency, communication integration, and streamlined workflows. The product is reliable, scalable, and easy to use, resulting in cost savings and increased productivity. On the other hand, users of VMware RabbitMQ have reported increased efficiency, seamless integration with existing infrastructure, and reduced downtime. The platform is praised for its scalability, reliability, extensive documentation, and strong community support.
Room for Improvement: IBM MQ product has received user feedback regarding areas that require enhancement, whereas VMware RabbitMQ has received feedback on areas including documentation, user interface, stability, performance, error handling, message routing, and support for clustering and scaling.
Deployment and customer support: The reviews for IBM MQ indicate that users mentioned different timeframes for establishing new tech solutions, with deployment taking three months and setup ranging from one week to one week. The reviews for VMware RabbitMQ also mention varying durations, with some users spending three months on deployment and an additional week on setup, while others mentioned a week for both. It is important to carefully evaluate the context in which these terms are used to determine if they refer to the same period or should be considered separately., IBM MQ's customer service is highly regarded for its promptness, effectiveness, and level of expertise. Users describe the support team as helpful, courteous, and professional. In comparison, VMware RabbitMQ's customer service is praised for its responsiveness, reliability, and efficient problem-solving abilities.
The summary above is based on 27 interviews we conducted recently with IBM MQ and VMware RabbitMQ users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"It's highly scalable. It provides various ways to establish high availability and workloads. E.g., you can spread workloads inside of your clusters."
"It offers better reliability and monitoring compared to other tools."
"Assists with our apps and has great message processing."
"IBM MQ deals mainly with the queuing mechanism. It passes the data and it publishes it. These two abilities are the most valuable features."
"This solution has improved and influenced the communication between different applications, then standardized that communication."
"There is no dependency on the end party service's run status."
"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."
"It also has a backup queue concept and topics, features that I have not seen anywhere else. I like these features very much."
"The solution has really cool features to use. Its management console is excellent. You can utilize plugins to view the performance of the whole service on one network."
"RabbitMQ will help to remove a lot of the complexities and create a loosely coupled codebase."
"The product's feature of data transaction works fast."
"The product's reliability is the most valuable feature."
"The message routing is the most valuable feature. It is effective and flexible."
"It is easy to use. The addition of more queues and more services can be managed very easily."
"The solution's best feature is its exceptional speed, delivering efficient utilization of resources."
"We use VMware RabbitMQ to transfer information from one point to another."
"I believe there is too much code to be done in order to handle the elements that you develop."
"IBM MQ's pricing is higher than its competitors'."
"IBM could revamp the interface. The API is huge, but some developers find it limiting because of the cost. They tend to wrap the API course into the JMS, which means they're missing out on some good features. They should work a little bit on the API exposure."
"It needs a User Interface which is better than the aging MQ Explorer. The existing solution MQ Explorer is outdated."
"I would like to see message duplication included."
"The issue is that they're using a very old clustering model."
"They probably need to virtualize the MQ flow and allow us to design the MQ flow using the UI. It would also help to migrate to the cloud easily and implement AWS Lambda functions with minimum coding. If you have to code, then just with NodeJS or Java."
"The solution requires a lot of work to implement and maintain."
"I was struggling with installing a few things. It would be good if was somewhat similar to RedHat. There should be more documentation regarding installation troubleshooting."
"The availability could be better."
"The product has to improve the crisis management, especially in memory issues."
"The next release should include some of the flexibility and features that Kafka offers."
"If you're outside IP address range, the clustering no longer has all the features which is problematic."
"The debugging capabilities and testing flexibilities need to be improved."
"They should improve on the ability to scale your queues in a very simple and elegant way with the same power that they have would be great."
"The support feature could benefit from some improvement in terms of accessibility and responsiveness."
IBM MQ is ranked 2nd in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 158 reviews while VMware RabbitMQ is ranked 5th in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 38 reviews. IBM MQ is rated 8.4, while VMware RabbitMQ is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of IBM MQ writes "Offers the ability to batch metadata transfers between systems that support MQ as the communication method". On the other hand, the top reviewer of VMware RabbitMQ writes "A cloud solution for asynchronous call with easy configuration". IBM MQ is most compared with Apache Kafka, ActiveMQ, Red Hat AMQ, Amazon SQS and PubSub+ Event Broker, whereas VMware RabbitMQ is most compared with ActiveMQ, Apache Kafka, Anypoint MQ, Red Hat AMQ and PubSub+ Event Broker. See our IBM MQ vs. VMware RabbitMQ 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.
