We performed a comparison between Red Hat AMQ and VMware RabbitMQ 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."My impression is that it is average in terms of scalability."
"Red Hat AMQ's best feature is its reliability."
"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."
"The most valuable feature is stability."
"The solution is very lightweight, easy to configure, simple to manage, and robust since it launched."
"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 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."
"The solution has really cool features to use. Its management console is excellent. You can utilize plugins to view the performance of the whole service on one network."
"We use VMware RabbitMQ to transfer information from one point to another."
"The most valuable feature is asynchronous calls, which are easy to configure."
"The product's reliability is the most valuable feature."
"It is easy to use. The addition of more queues and more services can be managed very easily."
"Large amounts of data can be moved pretty fast using the solution."
"The security is great."
"Some of the most valuable features are publish and subscribe, fanout, and queues."
"AMQ could be better integrated with Jira and patch management tools."
"This product needs better visualization capabilities in general."
"There is improvement needed to keep the support libraries updated."
"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."
"Red Hat AMQ's cost could be improved, and it could have better integration."
"There are several areas in this solution that need improvement, including clustering multi-nodes and message ordering."
"The turnaround of adopting new versions of underlying technologies sometimes is too slow."
"The solution needs improvement on performance."
"The availability could be better."
"The user interface could be improved."
"We needed to configure additional plugins. While it was relatively easy to do this on-premises, it became more challenging in the cloud."
"I would like to see the performance of the administration portal improved and additional messaging protocols."
"RabbitMQ is clearly better supported on Linux than it is on Windows. There are idiosyncrasies in the Windows version that are not there on Linux."
"The product is pretty hard to configure."
"Their implementation is quite tricky. It's not that easy to implement RabbitMQ as a cluster."
Red Hat AMQ is ranked 8th in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 7 reviews while VMware RabbitMQ is ranked 5th in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 38 reviews. Red Hat AMQ is rated 8.2, while VMware RabbitMQ is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Red Hat AMQ writes "A stable, open-source technology, with a convenient deployment". On the other hand, the top reviewer of VMware RabbitMQ writes "A cloud solution for asynchronous call with easy configuration". Red Hat AMQ is most compared with Apache Kafka, ActiveMQ, IBM MQ, IBM Event Streams and Amazon MQ, whereas VMware RabbitMQ is most compared with IBM MQ, ActiveMQ, Apache Kafka, Anypoint MQ and PubSub+ Event Broker. See our Red Hat AMQ vs. VMware RabbitMQ 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.