We compared Red Hat AMQ and Apache Kafka based on our user's reviews in several parameters.
The user reviews highlight that Red Hat AMQ is praised for its robust messaging capabilities, seamless integration, and excellent scalability, with exceptional customer service and support. In contrast, Apache Kafka is valued for its high scalability and fault-tolerant architecture, real-time data handling, and support for stream processing and data replication. However, Apache Kafka does not have feedback on customer service, pricing, or ROI, unlike Red Hat AMQ, which has some areas for improvement in scalability, ease of deployment, and customization options.
Features: Red Hat AMQ is recognized for its robust messaging capabilities, seamless integration, excellent scalability, reliable performance, and advanced security measures. On the other hand, Apache Kafka stands out for its high scalability, fault-tolerant architecture, real-time data handling, easy integration, support for stream processing and data replication.
Pricing and ROI: The setup cost for Red Hat AMQ is reported to be straightforward and hassle-free, with reasonable pricing. However, there is no available information regarding the pricing, setup cost, and licensing of Apache Kafka., Based on user feedback, Red Hat AMQ has a positive ROI with efficient workflow, increased productivity, reduced downtime, and improved message delivery. Apache Kafka's ROI reviews are either missing or unavailable.
Room for Improvement: Red Hat AMQ has room for improvement in scalability, ease of deployment, customization options, documentation, community support, platform stability, monitoring and management capabilities, and security features. In contrast, there is no specific feedback on improvement areas for Apache Kafka.
Deployment and customer support: Comparing the user reviews, Red Hat AMQ users mention varying timeframes for deployment and setup separately. In contrast, there is no information available regarding the duration required for Apache Kafka., Red Hat AMQ is highly regarded for its exceptional customer service and support. Users praise their prompt, friendly, and professional assistance, showcasing a deep understanding of their customers' needs. On the other hand, no feedback is available for Apache Kafka's customer service.
The summary above is based on 39 interviews we conducted recently with Red Hat AMQ and Apache Kafka users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"The high availability is valuable. It is robust, and we can rely on it for a huge amount of data."
"Kafka is scalable. It can manage a high volume of data from many sources."
"The most valuable feature is the support for a high volume of data."
"Ease of use."
"There are numerous possibilities that can be explored. While it may be challenging to fully comprehend the potential advantages, one key aspect is the ability to establish a proper sequence of events rather than simply dealing with a jumbled group of occurrences. These events possess their own timestamps, even if they were not initially provided with one, and are arranged in a chronological order that allows for a clear understanding of the progression of the events."
"The most valuable feature of Apache Kafka is its versatility. It can solve many use cases or can be a part of many use cases. Its fundamental value of it is in the real-time processing capability."
"We get amazing throughput. We don't get any delay."
"It seemed pretty stable and didn't have any issues at all."
"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."
"My impression is that it is average in terms of scalability."
"The solution is very lightweight, easy to configure, simple to manage, and robust since it launched."
"Red Hat AMQ's best feature is its reliability."
"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 is stability."
"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."
"We struggled a bit with the built-in data transformations because it was a challenge to get them up and running the way we wanted."
"Apache Kafka could improve data loss and compatibility with Spark."
"The solution could always add a few more features to enhance its usage."
"Prioritization of messages in Apache Kafka could improve."
"The solution can improve by having automation for developers. We have done many manual calculations and it has been difficult but if it was automated it would be much better."
"Kafka is complex and there is a little bit of a learning curve."
"The support on Apache Kafka could be improved."
"The third party is not very stable and sometimes you have problems with this component. There are some developments in newer versions and we're about to try them out, but I'm not sure if it closes the gap."
"The turnaround of adopting new versions of underlying technologies sometimes is too slow."
"AMQ could be better integrated with Jira and patch management tools."
"This product needs better visualization capabilities in general."
"Red Hat AMQ's cost could be improved, and it could have better integration."
"There is improvement needed to keep the support libraries updated."
"There are several areas in this solution that need improvement, including clustering multi-nodes and message ordering."
"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."
Apache Kafka is ranked 1st in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 76 reviews while Red Hat AMQ is ranked 8th in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 7 reviews. Apache Kafka is rated 8.0, while Red Hat AMQ is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Apache Kafka writes "Great access to multiple devices, with stability, at an affordable price". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat AMQ writes "A stable, open-source technology, with a convenient deployment". Apache Kafka is most compared with IBM MQ, Amazon SQS, Anypoint MQ, PubSub+ Event Broker and VMware RabbitMQ, whereas Red Hat AMQ is most compared with ActiveMQ, IBM MQ, VMware RabbitMQ, IBM Event Streams and Amazon MQ. See our Apache Kafka 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.
