We performed a comparison between Apache Kafka and IBM Event Streams 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 solution is very scalable. We started with a cluster of three and then scaled it to seven."
"Kafka allows you to handle huge amounts of data and classify it into different categories. If you have huge amounts of data, Kafka is a very good solution for data classification."
"It's an open-source product, which means it doesn't cost us anything to use it."
"Kafka's most valuable feature is its user-friendliness."
"The valuable features are the group community and support."
"The most valuable feature of Apache Kafka is the clustering which is very easy to scale and we have multiple servers all over our platforms. It has been useful for stability and performance."
"One of the most valuable features I have found is Kafka Connect."
"The high availability is valuable. It is robust, and we can rely on it for a huge amount of data."
"I'm an administrator, and what I like most is the interface, the security, and the storage."
"The stability has been good."
"The system efficiently processes and calculates the data flow within the cluster using DLP functionality."
"The product is good, but it needs implementation and on-going support. The whole cloud engagement model has made the adoption of Kafka better due to PaaS (Amazon Kinesis, a fully managed service by AWS)."
"The model where you create the integration or the integration scenario needs improvement."
"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."
"It's not possible to substitute IBM MQ with Apache Kafka because the JMS part is not very stable."
"Kafka 2.0 has been released for over a month, and I wanted to try out the new features. However, the configuration is a little bit complicated: Kafka Broker, Kafka Manager, ZooKeeper Servers, etc."
"The price for the enterprise version is quite high. It would be better to have a lower price."
"As an open-source project, Kafka is still fairly young and has not yet built out the stability and features that other open-source projects have acquired over the many years. If done correctly, Kafka can also take over the stream-processing space that technologies such as Apache Storm cover."
"Kafka does not provide control over the message queue, so we do not know whether we are experiencing lost or duplicate messages."
"It would be helpful if they could help us explain why they, as in, the customers, should use the product and the overall benefits."
"The product's interface needs improvement."
"In the next release, I would like to see the GUI allow you to configure the security section."
Apache Kafka is ranked 1st in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 76 reviews while IBM Event Streams is ranked 11th in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 3 reviews. Apache Kafka is rated 8.0, while IBM Event Streams is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Apache Kafka writes "Great access to multiple devices, with stability, at an affordable price". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Event Streams writes "Easy to use, stable, has a good interface, and the security is good". Apache Kafka is most compared with IBM MQ, Amazon SQS, Red Hat AMQ, Anypoint MQ and Oracle Data Integrator (ODI), whereas IBM Event Streams is most compared with Red Hat AMQ and IBM MQ. See our Apache Kafka vs. IBM Event Streams 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.