Users report that Apache ActiveMQ excels in asynchronous messaging with a score of 8.7, while KubeMQ shines even brighter with a score of 9.2, indicating a more robust performance in handling message queues.
Reviewers mention that KubeMQ offers superior ease of use with a score of 9.0 compared to Apache ActiveMQ's 8.8, making it a more user-friendly option for teams looking to implement messaging solutions quickly.
G2 users highlight that Apache ActiveMQ has a strong cloud-based messaging capability, scoring 9.0, which is a significant advantage for enterprises looking for scalable solutions, while KubeMQ does not have a specific score listed for this feature.
Users on G2 report that KubeMQ has a better quality of support, scoring 9.0, compared to Apache ActiveMQ's 7.7, suggesting that KubeMQ may provide more responsive and helpful customer service.
Reviewers say that while both products offer good application integration, KubeMQ scores slightly higher at 8.9 compared to Apache ActiveMQ's 8.3, indicating a more seamless experience when connecting with other applications.
Users report that Apache ActiveMQ has a higher product direction score of 8.3, suggesting a more positive outlook on its future development compared to KubeMQ's 7.4, which may be a consideration for long-term planning.
What is the difference between Kafka and ActiveMQ?
1 Comment
DT
Kafka is based on a publish-subscribe messaging model, where messages are written to topics and subscribers can consume messages from those topics. It is...Read more
Apache ActiveMQ has no more discussions with answers
With over 3 million reviews, we can provide the specific details that help you make an informed software buying decision for your business. Finding the right product is important, let us help.