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."There is a vibrant community, and it is one of the strongest points of this product. We always get answers to our problems. So, my experience with the community support has been good."
"The initial setup is straightforward and only takes a few minutes."
"ActiveMQ brings the most value to small applications because it will not cost you very much to complete."
"For reliable messaging, the most valuable feature of ActiveMQ for us is ensuring prompt message delivery."
"I'm impressed, I think that Active MQ is great."
"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."
"It provides the best support services."
"The use of ACK is valuable."
"The solution is scalable, and its performance is quite good."
"We use simple queues and exchanges to route messages to multiple queues. The publish/subscribe model is also helpful."
"The most valuable feature of Anypoint MQ is it comes with MuleSoft so we don't have to maintain separate components."
"Initial setup was very straightforward. Deployment is a cakewalk."
"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."
"It's easy to use and comes as a bundle package with the Anypoint Platform, removing the need for any complex setup."
"Good interface, simple to use and stable."
"There are some stability issues."
"From the TPS point of view, it's like 100,000 transactions that need to be admitted from different devices and also from the different minor small systems. Those are best fit for Kafka. We have used it on the customer side, and we thought of giving a try to ActiveMQ, but we have to do a lot of performance tests and approval is required before we can use it for this scale."
"The solution's stability needs improvement."
"The solution can improve the other protocols to equal the AMQ protocol they offer."
"I would rate the stability a five out of ten because sometimes it gets stuck, and we have to restart it. We"
"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."
"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."
"The UI. It's both a good thing and a bad thing. The UI is too simple. Sometimes you wanna see the messages coming to the queue, and you have to refresh the dashboard, the console of the product."
"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 customer service is not good enough"
"Anypoint MQ could improve the user interface."
"The product does not provide a priority level for the message."
"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."
"Information on monitoring could be improved."
"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."
ActiveMQ is ranked 4th 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, Amazon SQS, VMware Tanzu Data Services and Apache Kafka, whereas Anypoint MQ is most compared with Apache Kafka, Amazon SQS, VMware Tanzu Data Services, 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.