We changed our name from IT Central Station: Here's why
Get our free report covering Apache, IBM, VMware, and other competitors of ActiveMQ. Updated: January 2022.
563,148 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Read reviews of ActiveMQ alternatives and competitors

Solution Architect at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Good performance when a high throughput is required, but they need to implement a portal
Pros and Cons
  • "The processing power of Apache Kafka is good when you have requirements for high throughput and a large number of consumers."
  • "They need to have a proper portal to do everything because, at this moment, Kafka is lagging in this regard."

What is our primary use case?

I am a solution architect and I used Apache Kafka in this role.

What is most valuable?

The processing power of Apache Kafka is good when you have requirements for high throughput and a large number of consumers. 

What needs improvement?

They need to have a proper portal to do everything because, at this moment, Kafka is lagging in this regard. It could be used to do the preprocessing or the configurations, instead of directly doing it on the queues or the topics. If you look at Solace, for example, they have come up with a portal where you don't need to touch these activities. You don't need to access the platform beyond the portal.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have used Apache Kafka for between one and one and a half years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Apache Kafka is stable.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

This is certainly a scalable product. There are currently 30 or more people using it but we expect to scale beyond this. It is going to be an enterprise tool within the company.

How are customer service and technical support?

I am not directly interacting with the service people at this moment. It is limited for now because we are still exploring and effecting our architecture and design, and deciding how to align it with our existing strategy. There is not much progress in this regard and it will take more time.

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

Prior to working with Apache Kafka, there was no messaging queue system. For many projects, they were using the Azure Event Hub, but it was not serving the purpose. So, we started moving towards Kafka, and that's why we have procured Confluent Kafka.

Several months ago, I stopped working on Apache Kafka. I am now working on Confluent Kafka. It was not my decision to switch solutions.

My current organization has chosen Confluent Kafka for various reasons. One is that we have a large number of streaming requirements, and Confluent Kafka has one more layer on top of Apache Kafka to do this transformation and connecting with other multiple lane systems.

There are out-of-the-box features along with the KSQL features. For example, things like fetching the events are kind of query-based. So, that seems to be a good feature for our requirements. That is why we ultimately procured Confluent Kafka.

For some time, I have also worked with Solace and it has an advantage. Given that my core strength is integration, I work with integration platforms such as MuleSoft, Azure functions, then TIBCO. Based on our requirements, I found that the event-driven APA implementation with Solace was easier.

Solace also has a top-notch solution for portal management and you register your producers, consumers, and preprocessing logic. All of these things are pretty easy to do. This is an area where Kafka could use some enhancement.

How was the initial setup?

I don't think that the initial setup was a complex process.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

MQ messaging systems are not my core strength but for any integration platform where we have a large number of APIs and events, to integrate with an IoT platform, for example, I found Kafka is better than ActiveMQ.

I'm not getting into in MQTT or other things but comparatively, when you compare ActiveMQ and Kafka, Kafka has done better.

What other advice do I have?

I think that many people are using Apache Kafka just as a publishing and subscription model, but I feel that Kafka is better than that. Furthermore, Confluent Kafka is even more than that.

Confluent Kafka is offering features that are equal to those of a data lake. You can do lots with data, and huge data can be persisted. However, many people are not using that feature. Rather than make use of persistence logic, they are pushing the messages and consuming them. Maybe if people were using it for persistence, they would see the impact or real power of Kafka.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Senior Integration Consultant at a tech services company with 1-10 employees
Consultant
Allows for synchronous communication between systems but cannot handle larges volumes of data
Pros and Cons
  • "Initial setup was very straightforward. Deployment is a cakewalk."
  • "There are so many solutions like this, but this is not as mature as those products. The other MQ products have the capability of reprocessing and maintaining the persistence of the data. They can handle large volumes and large messages, but Anypoint MQ doesn't have those capabilities."

What is our primary use case?

We transfer data between systems. We are to save the data to make the communication between systems synchronous. We use Anypoint MQ for making the communication synchronous. The source integration component will place the data into Anypoint MQ, and the target company will take it from there.

How has it helped my organization?

Because our customers are moving from on-premise to cloud, it's mostly costs that have been saved and nothing else.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable feature is the messaging system.

What needs improvement?

Anypoint MQ is not a pure messaging product. There are so many solutions like this, but this is not as mature as those products. The other MQ products have the capability of reprocessing and maintaining the persistence of the data. They can handle large volumes and large messages, but Anypoint MQ doesn't have those capabilities.

It can only handle a maximum size of 10 megabytes. The other MQ products have a larger capacity. IBM MQ can handle 100 megabytes of data or even solid gigabytes. This doesn't have that capability.

This solution has a lot of gaps. It's not a pure MQ product. We have sort of exposed this product with different protocols like TCP. Also, it has to evaluate these capabilities compared to the other market products.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using this solution for four years. The solution is used on an iPaaS cloud provided by MuleSoft.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability of Anypoint is not as mature as other MQ products.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The scalability is under the hood. It is AWS, and it is reliable. It's not user-based. It is automation-based and IT products-based. We have deployed five or six individuals using Anypoint MQ.

This is not a pure provider. It is just a tactical solution cloud. In the long run, we want to go back to square one and use other MQ products like ActiveMQ or IBM MQ because of Anypoint's limitations. For instance, it can't handle more than 10 megabytes of data, and it can't hold more than 50 persistent messages.

Deployment and maintenance are automated. There is an initial automation that is required.

How are customer service and support?

Technical support is good.

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

We previously used a stable solution. We moved to this product thinking that the cost would be reduced, but things are not working as expected. We plan to go back to using the old solution.

How was the initial setup?

Initial setup was very straightforward. Deployment is a cakewalk.

What about the implementation team?

You don't need an explicit skill set for deployment. Anyone can do it.

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

I can't give you a straightforward answer because sometimes it depends on the usage. If you're going to have fewer than 5 million messages, it is free of cost. If you're going to have more than 5 million messages, you will be charged $100 per month.

What other advice do I have?

I would rate this solution 6 out of 10. 

We thought that this was a pure demo product. We moved from IBM to MuleSoft thinking that it would work like IBM, but that's not what happened.

My advice is to try to evaluate the product beforehand and see whether it fits your needs and requirements. Check if it covers all of your use cases. Otherwise, it won't work.

There are a lot of MQ products on the market, but this is suitable for small scale customers and not for large scale.

We haven't switched solutions yet, but the plan is to switch because of this product's limitations. It doesn't cover all the use cases.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Private Cloud
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate
Lead Software Engineer at a retailer with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 20
Stable and robust with proven technology, and they have good technical support
Pros and Cons
  • "The most valuable features are RDQM and queue sharing."
  • "I would like to see message duplication included."

What is our primary use case?

The primary use case of this solution is for the general merchandising and retail market.

How has it helped my organization?

From the infrastructure point of view, it's a great improvement and it's more flexible to the latest hardware. Also, it is flexible for whatever is coming or whatever is available for on-premises and cloud integrations.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable features are RDQM and queue sharing.

There has been a lot of improvement in architecture. It handles better with the new architecture such as Cloud, and Cloud-on-premises integrations.

Also, how Kubernetes can be deployed is helpful.

What needs improvement?

I would like to see message duplication included. We don't have a mechanism for duplicating a message.

There is a different model where you can have multiple subscribers and not publish the stored data to multiple subscribers. 

Duplication is the most important for sending the same data for different applications.

For how long have I used the solution?

We have been using IBM MQ for 15 years.

We are using 9.0.0.6 and in the process of upgrading to 9.02.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

In terms of stability, IBM has proven to be very rare. It's a very stable product.

We test in very large volumes.

We tested ActiveMQ and it's nowhere close to IMB MQ.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Scalability is an area that has improved a lot. The scalable data is different. 

The way the cluster handles and cluster load balancing is different than what it used to be.

Now with the uniform clusters, it's much better. There is a lot of competition especially with messaging. With streaming, people are using it for messaging also. 

It's very flexible to scale.

We have been using it for a long time. We have a team of 15 people who are using this solution. There are more than 5,000 integrations that are using this solution in all platforms, such as Mainframe, Windows, and Cloud environments.

How are customer service and technical support?

Tech support is very good. I guess other support groups if someone is looking for ADP accounts it lacks but in general technical support is good.

I would rate them a nine out of ten.

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

Previously, we did not use any other product. I am not familiar with other technologies.

I'm learning and doing some experiments, but we have found a  product for the volume we have.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is straightforward, it's easy.

If someone knows its basic structure, it is easy, but the open-source is much easier than IBM MQ because you just have to install it and start working on it. With IBM MQ you have some installation procedures.

The open-source version needs route access which could be security compliance and could be complex.

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

IBM is expensive.

What other advice do I have?

I would recommend this solution and suggest you start using it if you have the budget. It's very stable and robust. It's a proven technology, so no one needs to worry about that.

It all relies on the budget, that where all of the problems are. People want to use open-source, and businesses do not have a budget.

It's a good product to use.

I would rate IBM MQ a nine 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.
TomaszSobota
Java Programmer at Netcompany
Real User
Top 20
Has the ability to utilize plugins to view the performance of the whole service on one network
Pros and Cons
  • "The solution has really cool features to use. Its management console is excellent. You can utilize plugins to view the performance of the whole service on one network."
  • "I was struggling with installing a few things. It would be good if was somewhat similar to RedHat. There should be more documentation regarding installation troubleshooting."

What is our primary use case?

I primarily use the solution for research purposes. I've utilized it for my academic studies for comparing HTTPS protocols. RabbitMQ supported the protocols I needed and I've read also that it's one of the most commonly used broker services.

What is most valuable?

The solution has really cool features to use. Its management console is excellent. You can utilize plugins to view the performance of the whole service on one network. It's wonderful. I really like it.

What needs improvement?

I was struggling with installing a few things. It would be good if was somewhat similar to RedHat. There should be more documentation regarding installation troubleshooting.

It's pretty straightforward, the setup, but it would be useful to know what to do if you do face certain challenges. Right now, without more in-depth documentation, it's unclear.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using the solution for about one or two months. It's rather new to me.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The solution is very stable, from what I've witnessed so far. It's also a very fast system.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

I haven't scaled the solution myself, so I can't speak from personal experience. I have heard that the solution is not so simple to scale because there is a core node beside the solution. There's some sort of smoothing methodology when it comes to the messaging, so I assume it's not so simple.

How are customer service and technical support?

I've never contacted technical support for assistance.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was simple. The first time I installed it, I installed it on Windows. For me, it took about one hour. If a user was facing a few problems, I'd say it could take up to two hours. Typically it's pretty quick to set up because the recommendations are pretty good.

What about the implementation team?

I handled the initial setup myself.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

I was considering using ActiveMQ on AWS, but after some research, I decided RabbitMO was a more complex solution and one that is more commonly used, so I chose RabbitMQ over it.

What other advice do I have?

I'm only really using the solution for the purposes of research. I've just installed and am working on the latest version. My interest in the solution is purely academic, so I can't speak to how it would function within an organization.

I'd definitely recommend the solution, especially over HTTP in the Nico services platform. I've done my research and have discovered it's two times faster and more commonly used. It's also really easy to use on the Nico services platform because all of the components are in the cloud.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Public Cloud
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Thabiso Mofokeng
MQ , Websphere Message Broker Administrator at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 10
Easy to use, stable, has a good interface, and the security is good
Pros and Cons
  • "I'm an administrator, and what I like most is the interface, the security, and the storage."
  • "In the next release, I would like to see the GUI allow you to configure the security section."

What is most valuable?

I'm an administrator, and what I like most is the interface, the security, and the storage. 

You don't lose any messages, if they have been configured as personal, you won't lose anything.

What needs improvement?

It can be reduced, but when you are comparing them with ActiveMQ, the console beats ActiveMQ by far, and it's easy to use.

In the next release, I would like to see the GUI allow you to configure the security section.

If the security section could be completed through the GUI, it would make people's lives easy. People are not used to seeing a command, they just want to see a GUI.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been working with IBM Event Streams for approximately three years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

IBM Event Streams is stable.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The scalability depends on how you configure it. If you configure HA, then it will be scalable.

With it being stable, the on-premises version doesn't need to be scaled that much, because if you're running Active-Passive Architecture, the one node server is easy to configure it to reroute the traffic to the other node. Within five minutes you can have it running.

The whole company is using this solution. It's a middleware and all applications that use messages use IBM Event Streams.

How are customer service and technical support?

I'm satisfied with their support. Because of our relationship with IBM, any production issues we have, we get first preference.

How was the initial setup?

I don't know if it's because of experience, but for me, it was easy to install. It's just a matter of having an RPM, then click next, next, and next again.

The difficult part comes in when you have to configure the security. That is the most difficult part, but it's not that difficult.

It takes less than two hours to install. Two hours max, because I did one yesterday.

I installed it on AWS and it was easy to install the software. It was less than an hour for the bare minimum installation. Setting up the security, took close to two hours.

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

The pricing needs to be improved.

What other advice do I have?

I am happy with the product, other than pricing I don't have any other improvements that I can suggest.

I would recommend it. It's a stable application, and over the years their developers have worked on it, you're not going to have any downfall.

I would rate IBM Event Streams a nine out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: partner
Get our free report covering Apache, IBM, VMware, and other competitors of ActiveMQ. Updated: January 2022.
563,148 professionals have used our research since 2012.