We performed a comparison between Apache Kafka and IBM Event Streams 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 most important feature for me is the guaranteed delivery of messages from producers to consumers."
"The valuable features are the group community and support."
"Kafka, as compared with other messaging system options, is great for large scale message processing applications. It offers high throughput with built-in fault-tolerance and replication."
"It's very easy to keep to install and it's pretty stable."
"With Kafka, events and streaming are persistent, and multiple subscribers can consume the data. This is an advantage of Kafka compared to simple queue-based solutions."
"The stream processing is a very valuable aspect of the solution for us."
"Apache Kafka is scalable. It is easy to add brokers."
"The most valuable feature is the documentation, which is good and clear."
"I'm an administrator, and what I like most is the interface, the security, and the storage."
"The system efficiently processes and calculates the data flow within the cluster using DLP functionality."
"The stability has been good."
"I suggest using cloud services because the solution is expensive if you are using it on-premises."
"The interface has room for improvement, and there is a steep learning curve for Hadoop integration. It was a struggle learning to send from Hadoop to Kafka. In future releases, I'd like to see improvements in ETL functionality and Hadoop integration."
"There is a lot of information available for the solution and it can be overwhelming to sort through."
"An area for improvement would be growth."
"If the graphical user interface was easier for the Kafka administration it would be much better. Right now, you need to use the program with the command-line interface. If the graphical user interface was easier, it could be a better product."
"Managing Apache Kafka can be a challenge, but there are solutions. I used the newest release, as it seems they have removed Zookeeper, which should make it easier. Confluent provides a fully managed Kafka platform, in which the cluster does not need to be managed."
"Lacks elasticity and the ability to scale down."
"The initial setup and deployment could be less complex."
"It would be helpful if they could help us explain why they, as in, the customers, should use the product and the overall benefits."
"The product's interface needs improvement."
"In the next release, I would like to see the GUI allow you to configure the security section."
Apache Kafka is ranked 1st in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 78 reviews while IBM Event Streams is ranked 11th in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 3 reviews. Apache Kafka is rated 8.0, while IBM Event Streams is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Apache Kafka writes "Real-time processing and reliable for data integrity". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Event Streams writes "Easy to use, stable, has a good interface, and the security is good". Apache Kafka is most compared with IBM MQ, Amazon SQS, Red Hat AMQ, Anypoint MQ and Redis, whereas IBM Event Streams is most compared with Red Hat AMQ and IBM MQ. See our Apache Kafka vs. IBM Event Streams 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.