We performed a comparison between Apache Kafka 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."Kafka's most valuable feature is its user-friendliness."
"Scalability is very good."
"The most valuable features of the solution revolve around areas like the latency part, where the tool offers very little latency and the sequencing part."
"The solution is very easy to set up."
"We appreciate the ability to persistently and quickly write data, as well as the flexibility to customize it for multiple customers. Additionally, we like the ability to retain data within Apache Kafka and use features, such as time travel to access past customer data. The connection with other systems, such as Apache Kafka and IBM DB2."
"The main advantage is increased reliability, particularly with regard to data and the speed with which messages are published to the other side."
"All the features of Apache Kafka are valuable, I cannot single out one feature."
"The most valuable feature is that it can handle high volume."
"SDM: User-friendly tool which allows for a seamless approach to performing hotfixes, if required."
"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."
"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 graphical user environment is currently lacking."
"Observability could be improved."
"The UI is based on command line. It would be helpful if they could come up with a simpler user interface."
"Lacks elasticity and the ability to scale down."
"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 could always add a few more features to enhance its usage."
"We struggled a bit with the built-in data transformations because it was a challenge to get them up and running the way we wanted."
"I suggest using cloud services because the solution is expensive if you are using it on-premises."
"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 solution needs to improve support for new, more recent protocols on the API."
"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."
"Aurea CX Messenger could improve by making better use of the new APIs"
"The improvement is that it should be on the cloud and use web services."
"You should not hurry with upgrades without testing the whole product completely."
Apache Kafka is ranked 1st in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 78 reviews while Aurea CX Messenger is ranked 10th in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 7 reviews. Apache Kafka is rated 8.0, while Aurea CX Messenger is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Apache Kafka writes "Real-time processing and reliable for data integrity". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Aurea CX Messenger writes "Lightweight and efficient solution". Apache Kafka is most compared with IBM MQ, Amazon SQS, Red Hat AMQ, Anypoint MQ and PubSub+ Event Broker, whereas Aurea CX Messenger is most compared with TIBCO Enterprise Message Service, Mule ESB and WSO2 Enterprise Integrator. See our Apache Kafka 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.