"The solution is very easy to set up."
"The high availability is valuable. It is robust, and we can rely on it for a huge amount of data."
"Robust and delivers messages quickly."
"With Kafka, events and streaming are persistent, and multiple subscribers can consume the data. This is an advantage of Kafka compared to simple queue-based solutions."
"The most valuable features are the stream API, consumer groups, and the way that the scaling takes place."
"Good horizontal scaling and design."
"The most valuable feature is the support for a high volume of data."
"All the features of Apache Kafka are valuable, I cannot single out one feature."
"Companies can scale the solution, so long as they have server room."
"It is easy to use. The addition of more queues and more services can be managed very easily."
"It can be configured to be a very fast message broker. I like the stability, the built-in admin tools and plugin architecture."
"Some of the most valuable features are publish and subscribe, fanout, and queues."
"The user interface is one weakness. Sometimes, our data isn't as accessible as we'd like. It takes a lot of work to retrieve the data and the index."
"The model where you create the integration or the integration scenario needs improvement."
"The price for the enterprise version is quite high. It would be better to have a lower price."
"An area for improvement would be growth."
"The graphical user environment is currently lacking."
"Kafka has a lot of monitors, but sometimes it's most important to just have a simple monitor."
"More Windows support, I believe, is one area where it can improve."
"Something that could be improved is having an interface to monitor the consuming rate."
"They should improve on the ability to scale your queues in a very simple and elegant way with the same power that they have would be great."
"If you're outside IP address range, the clustering no longer has all the features which is problematic."
"There are some security concerns that have been raised with this product."
"The user interface could be improved."
Apache Kafka is ranked 2nd in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 22 reviews while VMware RabbitMQ is ranked 3rd in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 4 reviews. Apache Kafka is rated 7.8, while VMware RabbitMQ is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Apache Kafka writes "Open source, granular message retention options, and good third party support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of VMware RabbitMQ writes "A good tool that's simple to use and is great for messaging". Apache Kafka is most compared with IBM MQ, ActiveMQ, Amazon SQS, Red Hat AMQ and IBM Event Streams, whereas VMware RabbitMQ is most compared with IBM MQ, ActiveMQ, Red Hat AMQ, PubSub+ Event Broker and Anypoint MQ. See our Apache Kafka vs. VMware RabbitMQ 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.
