We performed a comparison between Amazon MQ and Apache Kafka based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM, Apache, Amazon and others in Message Queue (MQ) Software."The initial Amazon MQ setup is very easy both when you do it on your own or use the self-managed instance."
"The most valuable feature is the support for a high volume of data."
"valuable features relate to microservices architecture and working on KStream and KSQL DB as a microservices event bus."
"The most valuable feature is the messaging function and reliability."
"The stability is very nice. We currently manage 50 million events daily."
"The most valuable feature is the documentation, which is good and clear."
"The most valuable features are the stream API, consumer groups, and the way that the scaling takes place."
"Apache Kafka is scalable. It is easy to add brokers."
"I like Kafka's flexibility, stability, reliability, and robustness."
"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."
"Apache Kafka can improve by providing a UI for monitoring. There are third-party tools that can do it, but it would be nice if it was already embedded within Apache Kafka."
"The solution can improve by having automation for developers. We have done many manual calculations and it has been difficult but if it was automated it would be much better."
"The management tool could be improved."
"More Windows support, I believe, is one area where it can improve."
"Kafka has a lot of monitors, but sometimes it's most important to just have a simple monitor."
"Apache Kafka can improve by making the documentation more user-friendly. It would be beneficial if we could explain to customers in more detail how the solution operates but the documentation get highly technical quickly. For example, if they had a simple page where we can show the customers how it works without the need for the customer to have a computer science background."
"It's not possible to substitute IBM MQ with Apache Kafka because the JMS part is not very stable."
"would like to see real-time event-based consumption of messages rather than the traditional way through a loop. The traditional messaging system works by listing and looping with a small wait to check to see what the messages are. A push system is where you have something that is ready to receive a message and when the message comes in and hits the partition, it goes straight to the consumer versus the consumer having to pull. I believe this consumer approach is something they are working on and may come in an upcoming release. However, that is message consumption versus message listening."
Amazon MQ is ranked 8th in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 1 review while Apache Kafka is ranked 2nd in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 29 reviews. Amazon MQ is rated 8.0, while Apache Kafka is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Amazon MQ writes "Easy setup; the right option for small and medium-sized enterprises ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Apache Kafka writes "Good partition tolerance, message reliability, and API integration ". Amazon MQ is most compared with Amazon SQS, IBM MQ, VMware RabbitMQ and Red Hat AMQ, whereas Apache Kafka is most compared with IBM MQ, Amazon SQS, Red Hat AMQ, ActiveMQ and Oracle Event Hub Cloud Service.
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.
