We performed a comparison between ActiveMQ and Aurea CX Messenger 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 most important feature is that it's best for JVM-related languages and JMS integration."
"I am impressed with the tool’s latency. Also, the messages in ActiveMQ wait in a queue. The messages will start to move when the system reopens after getting stuck."
"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."
"ActiveMQ is very lightweight and quick."
"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 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 initial setup is straightforward and only takes a few minutes."
"The features that I have found most valuable are that it is very easy to develop. Most of it is graphical, but we also have the option to add any custom call that you need."
"The solution is highly scalable, this is very important for us. It can handle a lot of messages."
"ESB: Provides all kind of possibilities to resolve business needs. A lot of ready to use services plus custom Java services. I used a lot of them all."
"The solution offers excellent stability."
"The Messenger Broker is a really good feature."
"SDM: User-friendly tool which allows for a seamless approach to performing hotfixes, if required."
"Message Management: Better management of the messages. Perhaps persist them, or put in another queue with another life cycle."
"From the TPS point of view, it's like 100,000 transactions that need to be admitted from different devices and also from the different minor small systems. Those are best fit for Kafka. We have used it on the customer side, and we thought of giving a try to ActiveMQ, but we have to do a lot of performance tests and approval is required before we can use it for this scale."
"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."
"The solution can improve the other protocols to equal the AMQ protocol they offer."
"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."
"It does not scale out well. It ends up being very complex if you have a lot of mirror queues."
"I would rate the stability a five out of ten because sometimes it gets stuck, and we have to restart it. We"
"Needs to focus on a certain facet and be good at it, instead of handling support for most of the available message brokers."
"I don't know if the last version has the cloud option, but maybe that could be good. That could be something that is included."
"It should include/add more services with the product as per market demand. It should include custom Java services developed by any organization or provide a platform where users/developers can share ideas/custom services, etc."
"The improvement is that it should be on the cloud and use web services."
"Aurea CX Messenger could improve by making better use of the new APIs"
"The solution needs to improve support for new, more recent protocols on the API."
"You should not hurry with upgrades without testing the whole product completely."
ActiveMQ is ranked 4th in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 24 reviews while Aurea CX Messenger is ranked 10th in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 7 reviews. ActiveMQ is rated 7.8, while Aurea CX Messenger is rated 9.0. 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 Aurea CX Messenger writes "Lightweight and efficient solution". ActiveMQ is most compared with IBM MQ, Anypoint MQ, Red Hat AMQ, Amazon SQS and VMware Tanzu Data Services, whereas Aurea CX Messenger is most compared with Apache Kafka, TIBCO Enterprise Message Service, Mule ESB and WSO2 Enterprise Integrator. See our ActiveMQ vs. Aurea CX Messenger 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.
