We performed a comparison between ActiveMQ and Red Hat JBoss A-MQ for xPaaS based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, IBM, VMware and others in Message Queue (MQ) Software."The most important feature is that it's best for JVM-related languages and JMS integration."
"For reliable messaging, the most valuable feature of ActiveMQ for us is ensuring prompt message delivery."
"ActiveMQ is very lightweight and quick."
"I'm impressed, I think that Active MQ is great."
"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."
"Most people or many people recommended using ActiveMQ on small and medium-scale applications."
"ActiveMQ brings the most value to small applications because it will not cost you very much to complete."
"It provides the best support services."
"JBoss is easy to use, and we have a good partner here in Tunisia to provide local support."
"It does not scale out well. It ends up being very complex if you have a lot of mirror queues."
"Distributed message processing would be a nice addition."
"The UI. It's both a good thing and a bad thing. The UI is too simple. Sometimes you wanna see the messages coming to the queue, and you have to refresh the dashboard, the console of the product."
"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."
"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."
"This solution could improve by providing better documentation."
"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."
"JBoss could add more automation."
ActiveMQ is ranked 3rd in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 24 reviews while Red Hat JBoss A-MQ for xPaaS is ranked 12th in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 1 review. ActiveMQ is rated 7.8, while Red Hat JBoss A-MQ for xPaaS is rated 8.0. 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 Red Hat JBoss A-MQ for xPaaS writes "It's scalable and easy to use, and we have local support here in Tunisia". ActiveMQ is most compared with IBM MQ, Anypoint MQ, Red Hat AMQ, Amazon SQS and VMware Tanzu Data Services, whereas Red Hat JBoss A-MQ for xPaaS is most compared with IBM MQ and Apache Kafka.
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.