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."
"I'm impressed, I think that Active MQ is great."
"For reliable messaging, the most valuable feature of ActiveMQ for us is ensuring prompt message delivery."
"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."
"It provides the best support services."
"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."
"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."
"Good interface, simple to use and stable."
"The solution is scalable, and its performance is quite good."
"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."
"We use simple queues and exchanges to route messages to multiple queues. The publish/subscribe model is also helpful."
"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."
"Initial setup was very straightforward. Deployment is a cakewalk."
"The clustering for sure needs improvement. When we were using it, the only thing available was an active/passive relationship that had to be maintained via shared file storage. That model includes a single point of failure in that storage medium."
"I would rate the stability a five out of ten because sometimes it gets stuck, and we have to restart it. We"
"It does not scale out well. It ends up being very complex if you have a lot of mirror queues."
"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."
"Message Management: Better management of the messages. Perhaps persist them, or put in another queue with another life cycle."
"One potential area would be the complexity of the initial setup."
"Needs to focus on a certain facet and be good at it, instead of handling support for most of the available message brokers."
"The solution's stability needs improvement."
"Anypoint MQ could improve the user interface."
"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 solution is very costly. The solution should provide a package with fewer capabilities at a lower price for specific companies that don’t have a big IT budget. Not every customer requires all the capabilities of the software. It will be a good fit in the market, and they will easily sell it more."
"The product does not provide a priority level for the message."
"The customer service is not good enough"
"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."
"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."
"The solution's licensing model is expensive and could be improved."
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, Apache Kafka and Amazon SQS, 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.
