We performed a comparison between ActiveMQ and Red Hat AMQ 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."ActiveMQ is very lightweight and quick."
"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."
"It provides the best support services."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the holding and forwarding."
"Reliable message delivery and mirroring."
"The initial setup is straightforward and only takes a few minutes."
"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."
"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."
"AMQ is highly scalable and performs well. It can process a large volume of messages in one second. AMQ and OpenShift are a good combination."
"This product is well adopted on the OpenShift platform. For organizations like ours that use OpenShift for many of our products, this is a good feature."
"The most valuable feature for us is the operator-based automation that is provided by Streams for infrastructure as well as user and topic management. This saves a lot of time and effort on our part to provide infrastructure. For example, the deployment of infrastructure is reduced from approximately a week to a day."
"Red Hat AMQ's best feature is its reliability."
"The solution is very lightweight, easy to configure, simple to manage, and robust since it launched."
"The most valuable feature is stability."
"My impression is that it is average in terms of scalability."
"The solution can improve the other protocols to equal the AMQ protocol they offer."
"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."
"Needs to focus on a certain facet and be good at it, instead of handling support for most of the available message brokers."
"Distributed message processing would be a nice addition."
"The solution's stability needs improvement."
"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."
"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 several areas in this solution that need improvement, including clustering multi-nodes and message ordering."
"Red Hat AMQ's cost could be improved, and it could have better integration."
"This product needs better visualization capabilities in general."
"The turnaround of adopting new versions of underlying technologies sometimes is too slow."
"There is improvement needed to keep the support libraries updated."
"AMQ could be better integrated with Jira and patch management tools."
"There are some aspects of the monitoring that could be improved on. There is a tool that is somewhat connected to Kafka called Service Registry. This is a product by Red Hat that I would like to see integrated more tightly."
ActiveMQ is ranked 3rd in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 24 reviews while Red Hat AMQ is ranked 8th in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 7 reviews. ActiveMQ is rated 7.8, while Red Hat AMQ is rated 8.2. 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 AMQ writes "A stable, open-source technology, with a convenient deployment". ActiveMQ is most compared with IBM MQ, Anypoint MQ, Amazon SQS, VMware Tanzu Data Services and Apache Kafka, whereas Red Hat AMQ is most compared with Apache Kafka, IBM MQ, VMware Tanzu Data Services, IBM Event Streams and Amazon MQ. See our ActiveMQ vs. Red Hat AMQ 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.
