We performed a comparison between ActiveMQ and Aurea CX Messenger based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, IBM, Amazon and others in Message Queue (MQ) Software."The ability to store the failed events for some time is valuable."
"It’s a JMS broker, so the fact that it can allow for asynchronous communication is valuable."
"I'm impressed, I think that Active MQ is great."
"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."
"ActiveMQ is very lightweight and quick."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the holding and forwarding."
"For reliable messaging, the most valuable feature of ActiveMQ for us is ensuring prompt message delivery."
"The Messenger Broker is a really good feature."
"ESB: Provides all kind of possibilities to resolve business needs. A lot of ready to use services plus custom Java services. I used a lot of them all."
"The solution offers excellent stability."
"The solution is highly scalable, this is very important for us. It can handle a lot of messages."
"The features that I have found most valuable are that it is very easy to develop. Most of it is graphical, but we also have the option to add any custom call that you need."
"SDM: User-friendly tool which allows for a seamless approach to performing hotfixes, if required."
"This solution could improve by providing better documentation."
"The solution's stability needs improvement."
"Needs to focus on a certain facet and be good at it, instead of handling support for most of the available message brokers."
"There are some stability issues."
"I would rate the stability a five out of ten because sometimes it gets stuck, and we have to restart it. We"
"Distributed message processing would be a nice addition."
"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."
"It should include/add more services with the product as per market demand. It should include custom Java services developed by any organization or provide a platform where users/developers can share ideas/custom services, etc."
"The improvement is that it should be on the cloud and use web services."
"The solution needs to improve support for new, more recent protocols on the API."
"You should not hurry with upgrades without testing the whole product completely."
"Aurea CX Messenger could improve by making better use of the new APIs"
"I don't know if the last version has the cloud option, but maybe that could be good. That could be something that is included."
ActiveMQ is ranked 3rd in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 23 reviews while Aurea CX Messenger is ranked 11th in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 7 reviews. ActiveMQ is rated 7.8, while Aurea CX Messenger is rated 9.0. 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 Aurea CX Messenger writes "Lightweight and efficient solution". ActiveMQ is most compared with IBM MQ, Anypoint MQ, Red Hat AMQ, VMware RabbitMQ and Apache Kafka, whereas Aurea CX Messenger is most compared with Mule ESB, TIBCO Enterprise Message Service 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.