We performed a comparison between ActiveMQ and Red Hat JBoss A-MQ for xPaaS based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, IBM, VMware and others in Message Queue (MQ) Software."ActiveMQ brings the most value to small applications because it will not cost you very much to complete."
"Message broadcasting: There could be a use case sending the same message to all consumers. So as a producer, I broadcast the message to a topic. Then, whichever consumers are subscribed to the topic can consume the same message."
"Reliable message delivery and mirroring."
"The initial setup is straightforward and only takes a few minutes."
"I appreciate many features including queue, topic, durable topic, and selectors. I also value a different support for different protocols such as MQTT and AMQP. It has full support for EIP, REST, Message Groups, UDP, and TCP."
"The most important feature is that it's best for JVM-related languages and JMS integration."
"There is a vibrant community, and it is one of the strongest points of this product. We always get answers to our problems. So, my experience with the community support has been good."
"I'm impressed, I think that Active MQ is great."
"JBoss is easy to use, and we have a good partner here in Tunisia to provide local support."
"One potential area would be the complexity of the initial setup."
"This solution could improve by providing better documentation."
"There are some stability issues."
"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."
"Message Management: Better management of the messages. Perhaps persist them, or put in another queue with another life cycle."
"The UI. It's both a good thing and a bad thing. The UI is too simple. Sometimes you wanna see the messages coming to the queue, and you have to refresh the dashboard, the console of the product."
"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."
"Needs to focus on a certain facet and be good at it, instead of handling support for most of the available message brokers."
"JBoss could add more automation."
ActiveMQ is ranked 4th in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 24 reviews while Red Hat JBoss A-MQ for xPaaS is ranked 12th in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 1 review. ActiveMQ is rated 7.8, while Red Hat JBoss A-MQ for xPaaS is rated 8.0. 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 Red Hat JBoss A-MQ for xPaaS writes "It's scalable and easy to use, and we have local support here in Tunisia". ActiveMQ is most compared with IBM MQ, Anypoint MQ, Red Hat AMQ, Amazon SQS and VMware Tanzu Data Services, whereas Red Hat JBoss A-MQ for xPaaS is most compared with IBM MQ and Apache Kafka.
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.
