We changed our name from IT Central Station: Here's why
Sanjeev Nirala
Senior Technical Architect at Nagarro
Consultant
Top 20
Offers better reliability and monitoring compared to other tools, though performance is lacking
Pros and Cons
  • "It offers better reliability and monitoring compared to other tools."
  • "Scalability is lacking compared to the cloud native products coming into the market."

What is our primary use case?

There are a couple of projects where we are using MQ heavily.

It is on-premises right now. We are looking to move to the cloud in the future.

What is most valuable?

  • Offers better reliability and monitoring compared to other tools.
  • Integrates well with other IBM solutions. Therefore, it makes sense to use this product when a company has a large IBM solutions portfolio.

What needs improvement?

I would like IBM to improve the performance. Right now, it is lacking and can be bulky.

For how long have I used the solution?

We have been using it for three to four years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It is a stable product. The reliability is better than open source software solutions. MQ performs even in extreme conditions.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Scalability is lacking compared to the cloud native products coming into the market. However, IBM is working to move their products into the cloud.

The software is more suited for medium to large businesses.

How are customer service and technical support?

The support is good. They try to resolve problems as quickly as possible.

How was the initial setup?

The setup and configurations are very easy, not complex. I would give the product plus points for this. This is compared to readily available, open source products that make you scratch your head when you go to set them up because they don't have documentation.

It takes a couple days to deploy the product to production.

What about the implementation team?

We are a software development firm working with medium to large businesses.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

It is a very expensive product compared to the open source products in the market.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We are also using Kafka, which is an open source tool, extensively in our projects. 

What other advice do I have?

This is a good product if you are looking for 100 percent stability and reliability, as opposed to implementing an open source solution.

I would rate the product as a seven (out of 10).

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
IT Architect at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 20
Reliable messaging, great throughput, and great stability
Pros and Cons
  • "Reliable messaging and throughput are the most valuable."
  • "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."

What is our primary use case?

We use it for application-to-application integration.

What is most valuable?

Reliable messaging and throughput are the most valuable.

What needs improvement?

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.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using IBM MQ for 20 years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Its stability is great.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Its scalability is okay. The inside scalability is great. We are hoping that the outside scalability is improved in the latest version.

Most of the users are just using the applications, and they are using IBM MQ without realizing it. In terms of the number of people really dealing with IBM MQ on a global scale, there are probably around 30 users. They are actually working with the product. There are thousands of developers who are using applications with IBM MQ.

How are customer service and technical support?

I am an architect, and I talk with the architects of IBM. The engineers talk with technical support when needed.

How was the initial setup?

The basic setup is simple. The deployment is fully automated.

What about the implementation team?

We received the software from the vendor, but we deployed it on our own. We also do the maintenance ourselves. 

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

There is real money involved here. As compared to RabbitMQ, IBM MQ is on the higher side in terms of cost.

What other advice do I have?

I would recommend this solution for similar companies. I am very fond of IBM MQ because of the reliability and throughput part, at least on a single server. On the consumer and application side, RabbitMQ seems a bit easier to consume. It is a bit ahead in terms of the scale-out feature.

I would rate IBM MQ an eight out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Learn what your peers think about IBM MQ. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: January 2022.
563,780 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Senior Technical Lead at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 20
Scalable and reliable but needs action log statistical information
Pros and Cons
  • "The solution is very stable."
  • "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."

What is our primary use case?

We use the solution as a messenger software, in order to send messages to various applications.

What needs improvement?

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. Sometimes randomly the connection gets disconnected and we try to send a message, we get a failure. We then need to manually take an action on the message, which is happening quite a lot in production. We have been working together with the MQ team trying to increase the connection and some channel upgrades. We are taking steps in the right direction but the issue is not completely fixed.

Additionally, there is not any statistical messaging information being captured. We are not able to pull up any reports to determine when a message was sent. For example, how many messages during the day or during five minutes.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using the solution for 13 years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The solution is very stable. We have not had issues, except for the connection dropouts which could be related to the machine we are using.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The solution is scalable. It is flexible because, for us, we used the solutions adapter to provide the connection parameters to send a message. This has been quite easy.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We have previously used and still do, Rabbit MQ, which is open-source. It is getting quite popular because it is also stable and it has a good UI. This UI allows us to check the messages with some statistical data.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

This solution requires a license and we have purchased an enterprise license.

What other advice do I have?

I would recommend this solution. However, there are some emerging competitors on the market that provide a competitive alternative.

I rate IBM MQ a seven out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate
Eduardo Cano
Architect & System Engineer at Servicio de Impuestos Internos
Real User
Top 20
Offers session recovery and high availability with little maintenance
Pros and Cons
  • "The high availability and session recovery are the most valuable features because we need the solution live all day."

    What is our primary use case?

    We use it for file transfer and batch processing. We upload electronic documents to the Chilean government.

    We use version M2002 Model B and our clients use version 7.5.

    How has it helped my organization?

    We use it for our factory where we have a system that uploads electronic documents for the entire country.

    What is most valuable?

    The high availability and session recovery are the most valuable features because we need the solution live all day.

    The product gives us security.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been using it for six years.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    We are happy with the solution. It is stable and doesn't require much maintenance. Two people maintain this solution: an architect and engineer.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    We have two appliances, and that is enough for now.

    There are a million end users.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    The technical support is good. They respond in a timely fashion when we have problems.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    We switched to IBM MQ when we consolidated our software and hardware integrations.

    How was the initial setup?

    The initial setup was easy because IBM did the installation and integration of MQ with our appliance.

    The deployment took a month.

    What about the implementation team?

    The vendor did the MQ installation. We had a good experience with the IBM consultants.

    What was our ROI?

    We don't keep track of return on investment because we offer a public service.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    The price is high. 

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    I did not choose this solution. The company has had it for over 20 years.

    What other advice do I have?

    If you want high availability with little maintenance, choose this solution.

    We don't use containers yet.

    I would rate the solution as a nine (out of 10) because it is not perfect.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Dameer Siddiqui
    User at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
    Real User
    Top 20
    Stable with good features and a responsive technical support
    Pros and Cons
    • "The solution is stable."
    • "IBM MQ is not very user-friendly."

    What is our primary use case?

    We're a service provider. My company provides services to different clients that include financial institutions in the banking sector.

    IBM MQ is used for queue messaging. I have to install and configure, the MQ features of listener channels, remote queues, and some transmit queues. We enable these as per customer requirements.

    What is most valuable?

    The solution offers very good features, including listener channels, remote queues, and transmit queues.

    The solution is stable.

    The initial setup isn't overly complex. It's pretty straightforward. 

    Technical support is very good.

    What needs improvement?

    IBM MQ is not very user-friendly. MQ needs to redesign or add some sort of user-friendly interface in order to offer better performance.

    This is a very old solution. Nowadays, some other products are designed to be much more user-friendly as compared to IBM MQ. 

    The product needs better administration.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I've been working with the solution for three years. 

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    The solution is very stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. 

    How are customer service and support?

    We've found the technical support to be very good. they tend to match the severity level of the situation. We're quite happy with the way they respond.

    How was the initial setup?

    While the initial setup is not overly difficult, the user interface is not very user-friendly. 

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    I cannot speak to the pricing of the product. I can't say if it's overly expensive or reasonably priced as I don't deal directly with licensing. 

    What other advice do I have?

    We are an IBM partner. 

    I'd rate the soluton at an eight out of ten. For the most part, I've been pretty happy with its capabilities. 

    Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: partner
    Flag as inappropriate
    Mohammad Al-Smadi
    IBM System Administrator at Arab Bank
    Real User
    Top 20
    Has good stability and is expandable

    What is our primary use case?

    We are currently working on the use case. I work as an IBM system admin and part of MQ is hosted on the IBM server. We have a lot of other servers and appliances for IBM MQ that costs us a lot of money so we are currently looking for less expensive alternatives. Kafka is one of the choices on the table. We are looking to migrate to services on Google which is why Kafka was proposed for us to implement.  We use it to integrate the backend and front end solutions and applications. 

    What is most valuable?

    The most valuable feature is the stability. It's perfect in this way. 

    What needs improvement?

    We are looking for another solution that is less expensive. There is room for improvement. The live and portal monitoring needs improvement. 

    For how

    What is our primary use case?

    We are currently working on the use case. I work as an IBM system admin and part of MQ is hosted on the IBM server. We have a lot of other servers and appliances for IBM MQ that costs us a lot of money so we are currently looking for less expensive alternatives. Kafka is one of the choices on the table. We are looking to migrate to services on Google which is why Kafka was proposed for us to implement. 

    We use it to integrate the backend and front end solutions and applications. 

    What is most valuable?

    The most valuable feature is the stability. It's perfect in this way. 

    What needs improvement?

    We are looking for another solution that is less expensive.

    There is room for improvement. The live and portal monitoring needs improvement. 

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been using IBM MQ for four years. 

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    It's very stable. 

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    It's scalable. 

    How are customer service and technical support?

    I would rate their technical support an eight out of ten.

    How was the initial setup?

    The initial setup was average. Not so complex and not so straightforward. 

    The deployment itself, not including testing, took a couple of hours. 

    What other advice do I have?

    It's expandable but it will add costs that should be taken into consideration. 

    I would rate it an eight out of ten. 

    In the next release, I would like for there to be easier monitoring. The UI should be easier for non-technical users to set up appliances and servers. 

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Consultant at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
    Consultant
    Enables us to distribute records, working with a mainframe system

    What is our primary use case?

    All our applications run around MQ. We run a backend system working with a mainframe and we distribute records via MQ. We are using it daily.

    What is most valuable?

    From the time I joined this company I have been working with IBM MQ. Until now I haven't seen any severe issues related to it. Most of the time it's running. That is the advantage of IBM MQ.

    What needs improvement?

    It could be easier to use.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been working with IBM MQ for close to 14 years.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    It is stable.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    It can scale but sometimes, in terms of volume, it is not able to handle a huge volume. We also have limitations of queues…

    What is our primary use case?

    All our applications run around MQ. We run a backend system working with a mainframe and we distribute records via MQ. We are using it daily.

    What is most valuable?

    From the time I joined this company I have been working with IBM MQ. Until now I haven't seen any severe issues related to it. Most of the time it's running. That is the advantage of IBM MQ.

    What needs improvement?

    It could be easier to use.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been working with IBM MQ for close to 14 years.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    It is stable.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    It can scale but sometimes, in terms of volume, it is not able to handle a huge volume. We also have limitations of queues related to IBM MQ. We often need to handle a very big volume, but currently we do have limitations. If those kinds of limitations could be relaxed, it would help us to work better.

    How was the initial setup?

    I'm working on the development side. There is a setup team that is dedicated to working on implementations. I don't have enough hands-on in the configuration of MQ to comment on the setup.

    What other advice do I have?

    If you're looking for stability I would recommend using IBM MQ. But people, these days, are starting to work with Kafka, which is an open system. I don't have enough knowledge about Kafka to comment on it. I just work with MQ.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Srinivasa Reddy
    Assistant Manager at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees
    Real User
    Top 20
    The architecture provides assured delivery
    Pros and Cons
    • "I like the architecture it provides seamlessly for assured delivery."
    • "They have provided a Liberty Profile in the Web Console for administration, and that could be further enhanced. It is not fit for use by an enterprise. They have to get rid of their WebSphere process and develop a front-end on Node.js or the like."

    What is our primary use case?

    It's predominantly for message queuing, to assure delivery.

    Our team manages messaging aspects with this product, among others.

    What is most valuable?

    I like the architecture it provides seamlessly for assured delivery.

    What needs improvement?

    The monitoring could be even better by building it into the product. The disaster recovery mechanism could also be built-in. 

    I would like to see them not rely on third-party tools for everything.

    Finally, they have provided a Liberty Profile in the Web Console for administration, and that could be further enhanced. It is not fit for use by an enterprise. They have to get rid of their WebSphere process and develop a front-end on Node.js or the like.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been working with IBM MQ for almost seven years.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    It is stable, for sure.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    We are facing some issues with the scalability in some of the components. That can be improved.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    We are satisfied with the technical support.

    How was the initial setup?

    The initial setup is straightforward. It takes a few minutes.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    We started with IBM but we have recently been looking at Kafka and Solace.

    What other advice do I have?

    If you have mission-critical applications that rely on an exchange of data, and the data is very valuable, then I would suggest using MQ.

    We have a team of people of 50 to 60 people using it, in middleware admin.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.