The use case for IBM MQ is for message transfer between banks and SWIFT, and message transfers within applications in banks. These are the most used cases.
IBM MQ and IBM MQ Advanced (software)
IBM SoftwareExternal reviews
183 reviews
from
and
External reviews are not included in the AWS star rating for the product.
Reliable and secure performance consistently enhances message transfer
What is our primary use case?
What is most valuable?
IBM MQ is more reliable and secure than other software. There is a saying that for the last 30 years IBM MQ has never been hacked. It is more secure and reliable. Whenever the configuration is done, I do not have to touch it again. It works fine, it is stable, and its communication is to the point and accurate. All performance-related aspects are better.
Performance-wise, it is scalable, and other features such as DR, DC, replication, and active passive mode are complex to configure, but it remains scalable.
The pricing model for IBM MQ could be more flexible for clients.
What needs improvement?
Regarding improvements in IBM MQ, I cannot specify any issues because whatever requirements exist, I find them available since it is a very old product with all necessary features. I am not encountering any missing features in IBM MQ.
Feature-wise, everything required is available in IBM MQ. The pricing is consistently high, which is known in the market. In that scenario, pricing could be more competitive compared to other vendors.
The pricing model for IBM MQ could be more flexible for clients.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been working with IBM MQ for 3 years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
I would rate the stability for IBM MQ as nine out of ten.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
While not easy, IBM MQ is scalable. Performance-wise, it is scalable, and other features such as DR, DC, replication, and active passive mode are complex to configure, but it remains scalable.
How are customer service and support?
I would give technical support from IBM an eight out of ten.
The response time for IBM MQ support could be better because when we are using IBM MQ and something goes wrong, support is required as the resource availability of the IBM product is very limited.
How would you rate customer service and support?
Positive
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
Some of my customers are now using IBM MQ. Previously they were using Kafka, but after using IBM MQ, they decided to move to IBM MQ and remove Kafka because IBM MQ is more reliable and more performance friendly than Kafka.
How was the initial setup?
The initial setup for IBM MQ is very simple.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
For security, scalability, and performance, I suggest IBM MQ. However, customers have budget constraints and other considerations including application portfolio and requirements. There are alternatives such as Apache MQ and RabbitMQ. The choice depends on the budget, requirements, and priorities regarding security, performance, or budget. We can suggest the best solution, but if the customer cannot afford it, they might opt for the free option, RabbitMQ, or Apache MQ. It ultimately depends on the price and application needs.
What other advice do I have?
It depends on the application regarding what company size can use IBM MQ. If a small or medium company uses a complex application where security is measured, with multiple applications, they can use it. For enterprise level, it is mandatory if they require it because IBM MQ is a requirement product, not a day-to-day product. If you want the best solution then choose IBM MQ. I cannot suggest that small companies need it and enterprise companies do not need it. I rate this solution nine out of ten.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
On-premises
Ensured transaction security and reliability over fifteen years
What is our primary use case?
We deal with financial and non-financial transactions, and most of the financial transactions that interact with backend vendor systems are done via IBM MQ. It is manager-to-manager communication, and the transaction load is huge. That is one aspect where we need IBM MQ to communicate with backends.
What is most valuable?
With the setup that we have, financial transaction messages are not lost. We are primarily looking for a 100% quality of service in terms of non-repeating the message and message delivery. These are financial transactions, so we do not want to lose the message at any cost. That was the main reason why we have IBM MQ. Additionally, when dealing with posting financial messages to backend vendor systems, most of the revenue gets generated.
What needs improvement?
I extensively worked on IBM MQ some time back, but not at this point in time. We are dealing with IBM MQ client applications mostly, so I don't see any enhancements needed for the IBM MQ layer.
For how long have I used the solution?
I never used ActiveMQ or Amazon MQ. I have been using IBM MQ for the past fifteen years. It was my first message-oriented middleware, and I have been using the same middleware. I did not get an opportunity to explore other message-oriented middleware available in the market.
What was my experience with deployment of the solution?
No mentions of deployment issues in the transcript.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
MQ is just a message staging engine and not a processing engine. Usually, processing engines would be either DataPower, API Gateway, API Connect, or ESB. The transaction is always guaranteed with IBM MQ, which is the main reason I have been working with it for fifteen years while dealing with financial transactions or messages. The message availability is always guaranteed.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
The implementation utilizes multi-instance managers. As it is a container version, we can vertically scale it. In our environment, we do not have horizontal scaling for IBM MQ, but as demand increases, we would just vertically scale it.
How are customer service and support?
Right now, I am not working on IBM MQ extensively, and we do not delve into any of its PMRs, so the support should be good. With containerized flavors of these products, we are having a tough time dealing with PMRs because the versions are new to IBM. However, for non-containerized flavors running on blade, VMware, or appliances, they are pretty good. I would give them a rating of eight for their overall service.
How would you rate customer service and support?
Positive
How was the initial setup?
The setup is very straightforward, and it's not complex, even with container flavors. It's very easy with the advent of OCP operators shipped with CP4I. You can create a manager in less than a minute's time. It's not challenging at all.
What about the implementation team?
We have a huge team that maintains the infrastructure of the entire stack and manages applications deployed on top of IBM MQ and other solutions. But just for infrastructure, even for a production-ready data center, it shouldn't require more than a couple of resources.
What was our ROI?
The kind of workload we have deals with posting financial messages to backend vendor systems, and most of the revenue gets generated. There are definite cost savings and return on investment.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
IBM MQ is pretty reasonable when compared to IBM ESB. We do not take advanced security licensing for our transactions.
What other advice do I have?
I would rate the solution ten out of ten because I have been working on it for the past fifteen years. The message availability and transaction guarantee with IBM MQ is the main reason. I would rate it a ten overall.
If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?
Other
High-performance integration solution
What do you like best about the product?
It is a high-performance integration solution with various tools that further enhance the management and processing capacity of messages and scalability.
What do you dislike about the product?
I believe that many commands and tools available within the CLI could be available through the MQ Explore tools, allowing for easier management, considering the evolution of IT solutions that limit direct access to servers.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
The MQ helps us in processing multiple messages and solution bus integrations through the use of channels and remote transmission queues without the need for an intermediary architecture.
Improved message transport process supports thousands of high-volume transactions efficiently
What is our primary use case?
We use IBM MQ with a TELEX module for the airline industry as a transport layer. We compose messages specific to the airline industry and use IBM MQ for the actual message transport. We also use it for message transport related to scheduling flights, changing flight details, and capturing flight data like takeoff, airborne, landed, and on blocks.
What is most valuable?
IBM MQ processes many thousands of messages in a second, which is efficient for handling high transaction volumes. It is simple to use once you learn it, and the knowledge stays with you. It has contributed to better message transport compared to the Oracle-based solution we used before, which was slower. We have not experienced any downtime or crashes with IBM MQ.
What needs improvement?
It would be nice to have AI features and an updated graphical user interface. Currently, I am using it on Red Hat seven with a command line interface. Having a graphical user interface would improve usability.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been working with IBM MQ for about ten years or more.
What was my experience with deployment of the solution?
I did not take part in the deployment process. It was handled by another party and involved two engineers.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
IBM MQ is really stable. We have never had any downtime or crashes since it's been running.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
IBM MQ handles many thousands of messages in a second, indicating good scalability. It was more efficient compared to our previous Oracle-based solution, which was slower.
How are customer service and support?
I have not had any direct contact with IBM's technical support. It's mainly our administrators who deal with them. From what I heard, they are quite good, and I would rate technical support as an eight.
How would you rate customer service and support?
Positive
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
We were using an Oracle-based solution before, but it was a bit slow. Our customers are moving toward IBM MQ, so we made the switch.
How was the initial setup?
I did not take part in the initial setup. It was carried out by another party and involved two engineers, taking a couple of days.
What about the implementation team?
The deployment involved two engineers from another party.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
I am not exactly sure about the licensing cost compared to similar products, but I assume it is affordable since we continue to use it, and it is also used by our customers. I am not aware of any extra expenses or financial arrangements.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
I did not evaluate any other options aside from IBM MQ. Our choice is tied to what our customer uses, which is IBM MQ.
What other advice do I have?
I highly recommend this product to other businesses. It's a good product to work on and simple to use once you learn it. The knowledge stays with you. I would rate IBM MQ overall as eight out of ten.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
On-premises
IBM MQ web interface gui is nice all in one location
What do you like best about the product?
reiiable & well established message transfer mechanism.
web gui interface is very convenient and love the command line option in the gui to export/import values between multiple hosts
web gui interface is very convenient and love the command line option in the gui to export/import values between multiple hosts
What do you dislike about the product?
web gui latency is sometimes slow to complete request task.
dmpmqmsg works best on command line at the host.
deleting a large number (1,000+) of DLQ messages takes long vs command line on the host.
dmpmqmsg works best on command line at the host.
deleting a large number (1,000+) of DLQ messages takes long vs command line on the host.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
large number of servers and message flow between thousands of servers
Enables secure message handling and improved architecture with SSL support
What is our primary use case?
We are an integration company, so we deal with many software systems that aren't necessarily online all the time. Using MQ helps us by keeping a storage of the messages sent from one party to another so that once the second party comes back online, it will take from the queue. It is used for integration and middleware purposes.
What is most valuable?
I really like the SSL support in MQ, which allows us to include certificates so the queue is fully secured and prevents man-in-the-middle attacks. It is easy to create a new queue, and the queue manager connecting to the remote queue works smoothly once the IP and port are included. These features benefit us by ensuring integrity and security.
What needs improvement?
The software has many complications, especially with authorization on the queue. I had many issues with unauthorized errors and editing this authorization and giving users the right authorities on the queue was really hard.
Another improvement could be the inclusion of more advanced queue features where you can configure a queue to push messages to consecutive queues automatically.
Better error handling, such as a default dead message queue for errors, would be beneficial.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using it for about three months now.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
I have used IBM MQ with IBM ACE, and sometimes there are issues with messages in the queue not being taken by the message flow. I am unsure if this is a problem with ACE or MQ, however, it sometimes affects stability. Thus, I would rate stability at six out of ten.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
It is very scalable since it handles the concepts of message queues, the most scalable technique in integration development.
It allows for scalability and reliability by adding multiple queues and ensuring messages don’t get cluttered. It is very scalable, ten out of ten.
How are customer service and support?
I didn't need to contact technical support.
How would you rate customer service and support?
Positive
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
The usual solution was HTTP requests, and MQ is much better. It is more complex, however, we get persistent storage and the messages don't get lost if the other party is not online.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
The pricing is very high, but if it's going to be used by an enterprise or a large company with thousands of users, it will be very convenient. However, for personal use, it's not a good idea.
What other advice do I have?
I would recommend IBM MQ for companies. If we get a new IBM client, we will definitely recommend MQ because it will facilitate a lot in its request handling. For a legacy IBM client who is not using MQ, we encourage its use because it will improve architecture significantly.
Overall, I rate IBM MQ at nine.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
Public Cloud
If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?
Other
Used in financial market
What do you like best about the product?
Reliability and durability, cross-platform compability, security and transaction management.
What do you dislike about the product?
Complex setup and maintance, cost, performance overhead.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
Reliability in message delivery, decoupling of aplicativo components, secure and transactiom messaging.
Guaranteed message delivery and robust security enhance enterprise message handling
What is our primary use case?
I usually recommend IBM MQ for financial, government, and large enterprise companies. It is beneficial for handling high volumes of messages.
How has it helped my organization?
Using IBM MQ ensures the guaranteed delivery of messages, which is significant for my clients. It is also known for its security.
What is most valuable?
The most valuable features of IBM MQ are its guarantee of delivery, ability to handle high volume while maintaining high availability, and robust security measures such as SSL, TLS, and RBAC.
What needs improvement?
There are no improvements needed at this time.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been familiar with IBM MQ for roughly 20 years. It's been essential for many sectors during this time.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
I rate the stability of IBM MQ as ten out of ten.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
I give the scalability of IBM MQ a rating of eight out of ten.
How are customer service and support?
The technical support from IBM is good.
How would you rate customer service and support?
Positive
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
Before IBM MQ, I was not using similar products. For comparison, I have used Kafka.
How was the initial setup?
The initial setup is generally straightforward.
What about the implementation team?
Part of our work is to assist customers during the installation and configuration of IBM MQ.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
For an enterprise solution, the pricing of IBM MQ is very reasonable.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
I have also used Kafka before.
What other advice do I have?
IBM MQ has been in the market for over 20 years; it is an essential solution for most banking, financial, and government sectors.
I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
On-premises
Middleware for the Z
What do you like best about the product?
Ease of use, robustness and versatility.
What do you dislike about the product?
I would love to see a new age web based UI for administration on Z.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
MQ is our main messaging broker between business portals, external services to mainframe where core services run
MQ experience review
What do you like best about the product?
It is a robust product dominating in the area of Enterprise Messaging providing a variety if APIs for client application integration along with ehnanced mechanisms in message security and integrity, as well as, strong authentication and autohrization capabilities.
What do you dislike about the product?
The overall experience by using IBM MQ is positive. I would prefer more enhancements on message tracking in order to facilitate investigation on cases where messages are lost, jeopardizing transactions integrity especally when client applications are not capable of capturing or logging message delivery or consumption.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
The most severe issues i have faced while using IBM MQ, are related to long running transactions which consume IBM MQ (QM's) transaction log space and lead to transaction hang if not roll back.
The way IBM MQ treats application with long running transactions, leads application vendors (i.e. GPP, ..) to optimize their code resulting to better appliation performance.
Furthermore, IBM MQ (QM) logging mechanism contributes on problem investigation and root cause analysis, applying on several OSI layers such as OS, networking, application, etc.
The way IBM MQ treats application with long running transactions, leads application vendors (i.e. GPP, ..) to optimize their code resulting to better appliation performance.
Furthermore, IBM MQ (QM) logging mechanism contributes on problem investigation and root cause analysis, applying on several OSI layers such as OS, networking, application, etc.
showing 11 - 20