We performed a comparison between ActiveMQ and Amazon MQ based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Message Queue (MQ) Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The ability to store the failed events for some time is valuable."
"Most people or many people recommended using ActiveMQ on small and medium-scale applications."
"ActiveMQ brings the most value to small applications because it will not cost you very much to complete."
"It’s a JMS broker, so the fact that it can allow for asynchronous communication is valuable."
"Reliable message delivery and mirroring."
"The most important feature is that it's best for JVM-related languages and JMS integration."
"I'm impressed, I think that Active MQ is great."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the holding and forwarding."
"The tool's most valuable feature is its managed service aspect. It's simple to implement and use. It requires minimal effort to maintain business operations."
"The initial Amazon MQ setup is very easy both when you do it on your own or use the self-managed instance."
"Amazon MQ is a very scalable solution."
"It would be great if it is included as part of the solution, as Kafka is doing. Even though the use case of Kafka is different, If something like data extraction is possible, or if we can experiment with partition tolerance and other such things, that will be great."
"There are some stability issues."
"The tool needs to improve its installation part which is lengthy. The product is already working on that aspect so that the complete installation gets completed within a month."
"Distributed message processing would be a nice addition."
"Message Management: Better management of the messages. Perhaps persist them, or put in another queue with another life cycle."
"One potential area would be the complexity of the initial setup."
"The clustering for sure needs improvement. When we were using it, the only thing available was an active/passive relationship that had to be maintained via shared file storage. That model includes a single point of failure in that storage medium."
"I would rate the stability a five out of ten because sometimes it gets stuck, and we have to restart it. We"
"Amazon MQ is a good solution for small and medium-sized enterprises. It's open-source software, which means it's cheaper than its competitors."
"Depending on your use cases, Amazon MQ can be cheap or expensive."
"The product should improve its monitoring capabilities. It needs to improve the pricing also."
ActiveMQ is ranked 3rd in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 24 reviews while Amazon MQ is ranked 9th in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 3 reviews. ActiveMQ is rated 7.8, while Amazon MQ is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of ActiveMQ writes "Allows for asynchronous communication, enabling services to operate independently but issues with stability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Amazon MQ writes "Provides you with a URL where you can either send or retrieve messages". ActiveMQ is most compared with IBM MQ, Anypoint MQ, Red Hat AMQ, Amazon SQS and VMware Tanzu Data Services, whereas Amazon MQ is most compared with Amazon SQS, Apache Kafka, VMware Tanzu Data Services, IBM MQ and Red Hat AMQ. See our ActiveMQ vs. Amazon MQ report.
See our list of best Message Queue (MQ) Software vendors.
We monitor all Message Queue (MQ) Software reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
