We performed a comparison between ActiveMQ and Anypoint MQ 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 initial setup is straightforward and only takes a few minutes."
"It’s a JMS broker, so the fact that it can allow for asynchronous communication is valuable."
"ActiveMQ is very lightweight and quick."
"ActiveMQ brings the most value to small applications because it will not cost you very much to complete."
"Most people or many people recommended using ActiveMQ on small and medium-scale applications."
"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."
"The most important feature is that it's best for JVM-related languages and JMS integration."
"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 solution is scalable, and its performance is quite good."
"Initial setup was very straightforward. Deployment is a cakewalk."
"Good interface, simple to use and stable."
"The use of ACK is valuable."
"It's easy to use and comes as a bundle package with the Anypoint Platform, removing the need for any complex setup."
"The most valuable feature of Anypoint MQ is it comes with MuleSoft so we don't have to maintain separate components."
"The solution is very scalable with solid performance and the capability of extending it using any custom Java in case you don't have anything out of the box. MDP is strong. It is good compared to other products regarding its capabilities in managing or orchestrating the issue load."
"Messaging and queueing solution that has good stability and scalability. It can be used for a variety of messaging types."
"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."
"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."
"There are some stability issues."
"One potential area would be the complexity of the initial setup."
"Distributed message processing would be a nice addition."
"The solution can improve the other protocols to equal the AMQ protocol they offer."
"Message Management: Better management of the messages. Perhaps persist them, or put in another queue with another life cycle."
"I would like the tool to improve compliance and stability. We will encounter issues while using the central applications. In the solution's future releases, I want to control and set limitations for databases."
"Anypoint MQ's capabilities are mainly used for messaging purposes, but it doesn't have typical use cases that extend as far as other Message Queue software."
"Information on monitoring could be improved."
"When we are integrating with other applications, readily available connectors make it easy. However, when it comes to external applications, connectivity isn't as straightforward."
"Anypoint MQ could improve the user interface."
"The solution's licensing model is expensive and could be improved."
"It's extremely expensive to change things in Anypoint MQ. There's also this issue of slow output of messages, and that needs to be improved."
"The product does not provide a priority level for the message."
"There are so many solutions like this, but this is not as mature as those products. The other MQ products have the capability of reprocessing and maintaining the persistence of the data. They can handle large volumes and large messages, but Anypoint MQ doesn't have those capabilities."
ActiveMQ is ranked 3rd in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 24 reviews while Anypoint MQ is ranked 7th in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 10 reviews. ActiveMQ is rated 7.8, while Anypoint MQ is rated 7.0. 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 Anypoint MQ writes "Useful for asynchronous messaging, but it lacks features, and the storage is limited". ActiveMQ is most compared with IBM MQ, Red Hat AMQ, VMware RabbitMQ, Amazon SQS and Apache Kafka, whereas Anypoint MQ is most compared with Apache Kafka, Amazon SQS, VMware RabbitMQ, IBM MQ and PubSub+ Event Broker. See our ActiveMQ vs. Anypoint MQ 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.
