- Language: Firebase Cloud Messaging makes use of Java, Kotlin, XML, C, C++, SQLite in terms of languages and databases while Iron.MQ is language-agnostic.
- Performance: Firebase Cloud Messaging replaced Google Cloud Messaging in 2018 as an upgraded version that offers users a seamless and modern experience. To achieve this feat, they added a plethora of features like push notifications and Android, iOS and mobile web compatibility. Iron.MQ, on the other hand, is a top rated and fully functional message queuing service that is touted for its lightning speed and ability to be used by even the largest organizations and data loads without a loss in reliability or its performance in general.
- Scalability: Both Firebase Cloud Messaging and Iron.MQ are highly scalable infrastructures that make building out and maintaining a simple and frustration free process for users.
- Price: Iron.MQ is a paid service that requires a monthly subscription. The monthly price varies, depending upon a variety of factors including the amount of data and users needed. Firebase Cloud Messaging offers a free option, known as the “Spark” plan and a pay-as-you-go plan called the “Blaze” plan.
- Reviews: One of the reasons for the deprecation of Google Cloud Messaging was its lackluster reviews from real users. Although it was initially well-received, it lacked a lot of features and capabilities that serious developers desired access to. These features have been added to the revamped version of Firebase Cloud Messaging, but they come at a cost. For heavy users, the pay-as-you-go model is less than desirable. Iron.MQ has fewer reviews but is generally boasted as a fast and reliable message queuing service that grants users access to superb customer support with a set monthly fee.
Iron.MQ vs Firebase Cloud Messaging: Features and Benefits
Iron.MQ is a cloud-agnostic message queuing service that allows developers to streamline the process of communication when it comes to transmitting messages between services and components in applications. The SaaS model eliminates a lot of the work that developers would otherwise have to put into creating and maintaining their own messaging system and allows them to make use of the platforms user-friendly dashboard, reporting and analytics as well as advanced messaging features.
Firebase Cloud Messaging (FCM) is a message queuing service that was developed by the tech-giant Google in 2018 as a replacement for their former service known as Google Cloud Messaging. Although the new version offers the same result as Iron.MQ in terms of communication within applications, the service uses server APIs and SDKs that are maintained by Google and allows users to send push notifications, deep-linking commands, and application data without restrictions on message sizes.
While the original Google Cloud Messaging offered a fair number of features for developers like the ability for messages to be sent between Android, iOS and Chrome using simple messaging, it also allowed for downstream and upstream messaging to enhance reliability and battery-efficiency. All of these features have been retained with the new Firebase Cloud Messaging, but now heavy users are subjected to a pay-as-you-go fee model. When it comes to Iron.MQ, the biggest benefit is undoubtedly the speed and ease of scalability. Other features harnessed by Iron.MQ include push and pull queues, long polling, error queues, alerts and triggers, reports and analytics, back up and a user-friendly dashboard. Both services focus on securing messages with token authentication methods but Iron.MQ has more of a focus on flexibility and configuration for developers.
Iron.MQ vs Firebase Cloud Messaging: Pricing
Iron.MQ is a paid service that requires users to pay a monthly subscription fee based on their level of usage. For enterprises, a custom quote is required before starting the subscription although all users can access a free trial before making the commitment to the monthly subscription. Likewise, users who pay an annual fee in advance (versus monthly) will receive a large discount for their upfront payment. Firebase Cloud Messaging has two pricing options: free and pay-as-you-go. The free version, known as the “Spark” plan enforces limitations on data with a maximum of 1 GiB of storage on the Cloud, along with limited features. The paid “Blaze” plan allows access to all features and does not come with data limits, although users must pay for all data beyond what the free plan offers.
Iron.io Serverless Tools
Speak to us to learn how IronMQ is an essential product for your application to become cloud elastic.
Iron.MQ vs Firebase Cloud Messaging: Reviews
When it comes down to comparing reviews by actual users of the two services, the most notable difference at first glance is the number of reviews. Because Iron.MQ only offers a paid service, it has far fewer users than Firebase Cloud Messaging. Despite this, Iron.MQ has strong reviews on several reputable websites and averages around 4.5 out of 5 stars. The number one “pros” of the service as described by real users is the access to customer support that is not offered by Firebase Cloud Messaging. Users also note simple integration, easy scaling, and reliability as top benefits of the service. As for Firebase Cloud Messaging, the reviews are also in the 4-star range but with many more complaints about the level of support received and occasional outages which affected its reliability.
All in all, the comparison of Iron.MQ vs Firebase Cloud Messaging does not lead to a blatant winner in terms of performance or reviews. They both aid in streamlining communication between components and services in applications, although Iron.MQ is faster and more reliable while Firebase Cloud Messaging is more popular and free to use up to 1 GiB.
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.