Compare Apache ActiveMQ and IBM MQ 
- Users report that IBM MQ excels in asynchronous messaging with a score of 9.0, while Apache ActiveMQ follows closely with a score of 8.7, indicating that IBM MQ may be better suited for applications requiring high-performance messaging.
- Reviewers mention that IBM MQ's quality of support is rated at 8.3, which is higher than Apache ActiveMQ's 7.7, suggesting that users may find more reliable assistance and resources when using IBM MQ.
- G2 users highlight that IBM MQ has a more robust disaster recovery feature, scoring 7.9, compared to Apache ActiveMQ, which lacks a specific score in this area, indicating that IBM MQ may offer better resilience in critical situations.
- Users on G2 note that both products have similar language support ratings, with IBM MQ at 8.4 and Apache ActiveMQ at 8.7, but reviewers mention that ActiveMQ's flexibility with various programming languages can be a deciding factor for developers.
- Reviewers say that IBM MQ's application integration score of 8.6 outperforms Apache ActiveMQ's 8.3, suggesting that IBM MQ may provide a more seamless experience when integrating with other applications.
- Users report that while both products have strong cloud-based messaging capabilities, IBM MQ's score of 8.4 indicates a more mature offering, which may be crucial for organizations looking to leverage cloud infrastructure effectively.
It supports multiple languages such as Java, C, C++ , Perl , Python, PHP , C# , Ruby, etc. It has many advanced features such as Composite Destinations, Virtual Destinations, Message Groups, Wildcards. It has Spring framework support as well. Supports...
It's has become legacy and more alternate managed services are available in many cloud providers
MQ and message queuing is not the most sexy of applications. Few will have a need for it, but when you do, you'll realise how critical this can be. If you build a system that needs to support hundreds/thousands of transactions per hour, the biggest worry is...
The interface is not the most user friendly and at times is hard to navigate
It supports multiple languages such as Java, C, C++ , Perl , Python, PHP , C# , Ruby, etc. It has many advanced features such as Composite Destinations, Virtual Destinations, Message Groups, Wildcards. It has Spring framework support as well. Supports...
MQ and message queuing is not the most sexy of applications. Few will have a need for it, but when you do, you'll realise how critical this can be. If you build a system that needs to support hundreds/thousands of transactions per hour, the biggest worry is...
It's has become legacy and more alternate managed services are available in many cloud providers
The interface is not the most user friendly and at times is hard to navigate
