IBM MQ and IBM MQ Advanced (software)

Qu'aimez-vous le plus à propos de the product?

Garantit la livraison des messages une seule fois
Gère un trafic intense avec un délai minimal
Prend en charge l'authentification des canaux avec ssl/tls, la messagerie sécurisée est prise en charge
Facile à créer et à maintenir l'environnement
Cloud Native HA est une très bonne solution !

Que n’aimez-vous pas à propos de the product?

L'interface utilisateur semble un peu dépassée, elle pourrait bénéficier d'une mise à jour.
La configuration TLS du canal n'est pas toujours facile, d'autres clients ont souvent des difficultés à la mettre en place.
La sécurité de la file d'attente MQ ne semble pas intuitive au début, cela pourrait être plus facile à démarrer.

Quels sont les problèmes que the product résout, et en quoi cela vous est-il bénéfique?

Coordinateur de transactions pour les intégrations middleware
Plateforme de messagerie
Stockage persistant des messages

Qu'aimez-vous le plus à propos de the product?

Configuration facile. Fiabilité, robustesse. Facile à gérer.

Que n’aimez-vous pas à propos de the product?

Rien.
Aucun.
Je n'ai trouvé aucun inconvénient jusqu'à présent dans les utilisations que nous avons d'IBM MQ.

Quels sont les problèmes que the product résout, et en quoi cela vous est-il bénéfique?

Nous utilisons IBM MQ pour communiquer avec d'autres institutions à SPB. Nous utilisons le MQ pour échanger des messages entre le système hérité (mainframe) et la plateforme basse.

With IBM MQ , the main use case is for applications in online banking. We use it within the banking industry. IBM MQ  is a choice to create a relation between the Mainframe and distributed servers, allowing applications running on Linux or Windows to interface with Mainframe applications and enable more development of easier and open applications in a distributed environment. This means we can develop more applications that are easier to use.

I work with CICs, Workload Manager, and DB2  mainly. I have experience with IBM MQ . We mainly use clusters at the Windows level or Linux level, and in the Mainframe, we have multiple paths and different lines of connectivity transmission to assess the impact of IBM MQ 's high-availability configurations on our system's resilience.

We use advanced security features such as SSH for encryption and authentication mechanisms. The security features help protect our messaging data by encrypting the transmission and ensuring authentication for connection.

The customer service or technical support from IBM is not as good as we expected; it could be better. They don't meet our standards due to the timing to get a person with knowledge.

We use some IBM solutions hosted on AWS  as a cloud provider.

The initial setup of IBM MQ is reasonable, just as we were expecting, and we were on time for that project.

The maintenance for IBM MQ is good to be once a year; that's the best.

We mainly use clusters at the Windows level or Linux level, and in the Mainframe, we have multiple paths and different lines of connectivity transmission to assess the impact of IBM MQ's high-availability configurations on our system's resilience.

The customer service or technical support from IBM is not as good as we expected; it could be better. I rate them a 7 on a scale of 1 to 10. They don't meet our standards due to the timing to get a person with knowledge.

Positive

I don't really know the main differences between IBM MQ and other messaging queue solutions because it has been my natural choice, coming from Mainframe z/OS.

The initial setup of IBM MQ is reasonable, just as we were expecting, and we were on time for that project.

In the setup, there are mainly two persons involved, but others from different areas are also involved, making it more than just those two.

I currently work with IBM, but we are also using other vendors such as BMC and Logon for specific backup solutions from Mainframe.

My main experience is with IBM Mainframe. I do not have experience with their IBM QRadar . AWS  is not our main cloud provider for IBM solutions. I am not very experienced with cloud, but we do use object storage, which is cloud or on-prem for example.

I don't remember specific examples at this moment, but if you contact me in two days, I will probably be able to refresh my memory as I'm currently focused on the capacity and performance issues of the system. I don't have thoughts on IBM MQ's pricing since I work in the support area and I'm not related to the purchasing process.

My company mainly provides services to the banking area but also sells many products, including IBM and open system solutions, such as storage. My company's name is Telcos, spelled T-A-L-C-O-S.

I am very interested in providing a review for the IBM Workload Automation  based on my recent experience with it. I am still working with Workload Automation  and probably have a project related to this support, but I have switched to focusing more on performance issues at the moment. I used to be more focused on Workload Automation, but now I have shifted my project to banking application performance and capacity.

I still work with IBM solutions in the other area, maintaining contact with AWS that relates to Workload Automation. I deal with banking services in general performance, mainly related to recovery, backup solutions, and CPU utilization. I have experience with IBM ProtecTIER, specifically the ProtecTIER, and not Tivoli. I do not remember experiencing Spectrum. I do not have experience with Spectrum Protect.

I have experience with backup and recovery, particularly on the Mainframe side, but not with HSM. HSM is more related to the Mainframe, and while I don't have recent experience, my focus has shifted to performance areas in z/OS, especially solutions relating to backups and disaster recovery.

We move data from Mainframe to the cloud. BMC is one of the companies I refer to, along with Logon. Logon is spelled L-O-G-O-N. Logon is based in Israel.

Overall, I would rate IBM MQ an 8 out of 10.

Hybrid Cloud

Amazon Web Services (AWS)

My use case for IBM MQ  is that it's a middleware solution for our enterprise.

The features of IBM MQ  that have proven most effective for ensuring message delivery reliability are the stability of the system, the resilience and the product, which is definitely of top quality in this segment. This is a product which is very common, and many competent products are there, but it's time-tested, very stable, highly resilient, and has all the features to troubleshoot even if something goes wrong. It's the best from all perspectives.

The areas of IBM MQ  that have room for improvement are its compatibility with the public clouds, specifically its compatibility with Azure  or AWS , as there is definitely a lot of scope for improvement there.

In our organization, we have been using IBM MQ  for around 10 years, but we moved it to cloud two and a half years ago. The product has been in use for the last 10 years on-premises, and recently, for two and a half years, we have been using it on cloud.

We used a direct service from IBM for the deployment of IBM MQ in our environment. It is not a third party, but it is a service taken from IBM itself. There is an IBM subsidiary IT team in the Middle East who has helped us.

I would rate the technical support from IBM as seven out of 10.

The reason for this rating is due to the turnaround time, which is an important factor. IBM follows a practice of raising a ticket and has specified turnaround times to get back to us. Though usually, if it is high priority or top priority, they turn around faster, even for medium or low priority issues, their turnaround time is not as good to complete our project. We cannot hold on to the project for a long time just to wait for IBM to fix the issues. Our project will have its own timelines, so we expect turnaround times for medium and low priority incidents or tickets to be better than what IBM is currently offering.

Neutral

I did not use a different solution before IBM MQ. For the last 10 years, we have been using this solution, so I don't remember what was there 10 years back.

The initial setup of IBM MQ was complex on cloud. If it had been on-premises, it would have been very simple. On cloud, it is complex, and we had to take help from IBM itself for that.

We used a direct service from IBM for the deployment of IBM MQ in our environment. It is not a third party, but it is a service taken from IBM itself. There is an IBM subsidiary IT team in the Middle East who has helped us.

I have seen an ROI from IBM MQ in terms of its role as a tool for integration platforms; however, it does not directly relate to any cost or revenue. It does not have functional features, as it's a product which integrates the external systems with internal systems or among the systems themselves, making it an essential technology component required to integrate multiple systems.

The price of IBM MQ is definitely on the higher side. There are many market-competitive products, but this is a top product in the market and messaging middleware software, so the cost is high.

The approximate number of end users in our organization using IBM MQ is roughly 30.

I would recommend IBM MQ to other people.

I do not wish to disclose my organization's name or email because this does not represent the organization's viewpoint officially.

I rate IBM MQ overall as a seven on a scale from 1 to 10, when 1 is the worst solution, and 10 is the best solution.

Public Cloud

Other

We use it for payment processing and to send these payments abroad in another country.

We use it for the production environment, and we consider it stable enough, which is why we continue to use this product.

The biggest advantage is that it's a reliable enough product which we use, and it's a highly documented product. We can learn it slowly, so we have experienced users and experienced staff to use this product.

We suppose it's secure because we use secure tools within the frame of this product, such as TLS 1.3 and so on. Its scalability is enough for our purposes, and that's all we can say about it.

Currently, we have some disadvantages; it's a bit difficult to use IBM ID to access support from the IBM site. To get nice support from IBM, we need to use IBM ID, and it's a bit complicated to integrate it with IBM support.

Support can be better because sometimes we need explanations for some behaviors of the product, and it's not easy to reach the proper person in IBM support.

They could add some new features into IBM MQ  to make it better. A graphical user interface in addition to MQ  Explorer could be useful, but we are satisfied with MQ  Explorer as well.

We have been using it in general for about 10 years.

We have some experience with installations, and it's difficult. We need to state that it requires some experience and knowledge. We have required experience, having used this product about 10 years.

Its scalability is enough for our purposes, and that's all we can say about it.

Support can be better because sometimes we need explanations for some behaviors of the product, and it's not easy to reach the proper person in IBM support.

Positive

I cannot compare with other products, and I cannot give exact answers regarding whether it's expensive or cheap, as I don't know the costs of other products in this group. For us, we pay for it, and we rely on this product, and it's okay.

It's possible to get some training, but the cost of this learning is expensive. It costs some money, but we have required experience and knowledge because we have been using it for about 10 years.

It's possible to get some training, but the cost of this learning is expensive. It costs some money, but we have required experience and knowledge because we have been using it for about 10 years.

I cannot compare with other products, and I cannot give exact answers regarding whether it's expensive or cheap, as I don't know the costs of other products in this group. For us, we pay for it, and we rely on this product, and it's okay.

I'm just a user, representing Raiffeisen Bank, and it's clear.

We use WebSphere MQ , which includes some tools such as ActiveMQ , IBM MQ, and VMware.

Today, we don't use AI for our purposes, but if we find any useful AI features for this product, we might use them later because we can't evaluate their reliability for our needs right now.

On a scale of 1-10, I rate IBM MQ a nine.

On-premises

IBM