The company uses the complete solution, the vanilla Apache Kafka solution.

We have also used AMQ in production. In a large company, we're exposed to many solutions; it's likely you'll touch some of these at some point.

We often use solutions based on recommendations or what the enterprise architects decide. We don't typically do comparisons to decide on a specific tool.

I have used Weblogic MQ and IBM MQ before, and I switched to AMQ because we wanted to have a cheaper, faster and easier solution for messages.

We are supporting almost all the messaging platforms for our connectors. So I have been using other messaging products as well.

ActiveMQ is a component of the product that is currently being developed.

Previously, we used IBM MQ, but it is now something that is recommended in the internal queuing mechanism for the middleware. That is why we are using this. Aside from that, we do not use ActiveMQ anywhere in the organization.

Before using this solution, we worked with IBM MQ more than four years ago. We switched because the first issue was scalability. I'm not sure about the current version, but when our team was working on the older version, scalability was one bottleneck. Second, we had challenges with the upgrades. From version six to seven, it was a challenge.

We considered switching from WebLogic JMS, since we faced many issues including message affinity and lost messages.

We used to deploy Apache Kafka, as it was best for big data.

I used JMS before.

We used JMS embedded in an application. Because of scalability issues, the JMS console, and isolation, we switched to ActiveMQ.

We previously used WebSphere MQ and switched mainly due to licensing costs.

Previously, we were using RabbitMQ, but it didn’t support MQTT QoS 2.

We didn’t have a previous solution.

The strategic architecture in the organization required a more lightweight, yet mature, capable, reliable, and scalable open source alternative.

We didn't have a previous solution.

This is our first foray into the world of messages.