We performed a comparison between Apache Kafka and Aurea CX Messenger 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."All the features of Apache Kafka are valuable, I cannot single out one feature."
"It eases our current data flow and framework."
"Kafka is scalable. It can manage a high volume of data from many sources."
"The high availability is valuable. It is robust, and we can rely on it for a huge amount of data."
"The most valuable features are the stream API, consumer groups, and the way that the scaling takes place."
"I have seen a return on investment with this solution."
"Deployment is speedy."
"The most valuable features of the solution revolve around areas like the latency part, where the tool offers very little latency and the sequencing part."
"The features that I have found most valuable are that it is very easy to develop. Most of it is graphical, but we also have the option to add any custom call that you need."
"The Messenger Broker is a really good feature."
"The solution is highly scalable, this is very important for us. It can handle a lot of messages."
"The solution offers excellent stability."
"SDM: User-friendly tool which allows for a seamless approach to performing hotfixes, if required."
"ESB: Provides all kind of possibilities to resolve business needs. A lot of ready to use services plus custom Java services. I used a lot of them all."
"Kafka is complex and there is a little bit of a learning curve."
"Stability of the API and the technical support could be improved."
"Apache Kafka has performance issues that cause it to lag."
"The solution's initial setup process was complex."
"We cannot apply all of our security requirements because it is hard to upload them."
"The manageability should be improved. There are lots of things we need to manage and it should have a function that enables us to manage them all cohesively."
"The price for the enterprise version is quite high. It would be better to have a lower price."
"An area for improvement would be growth."
"You should not hurry with upgrades without testing the whole product completely."
"It should include/add more services with the product as per market demand. It should include custom Java services developed by any organization or provide a platform where users/developers can share ideas/custom services, etc."
"Aurea CX Messenger could improve by making better use of the new APIs"
"The solution needs to improve support for new, more recent protocols on the API."
"The improvement is that it should be on the cloud and use web services."
"I don't know if the last version has the cloud option, but maybe that could be good. That could be something that is included."
Apache Kafka is ranked 1st in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 78 reviews while Aurea CX Messenger is ranked 10th in Message Queue (MQ) Software with 7 reviews. Apache Kafka is rated 8.0, while Aurea CX Messenger is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Apache Kafka writes "Real-time processing and reliable for data integrity". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Aurea CX Messenger writes "Lightweight and efficient solution". Apache Kafka is most compared with IBM MQ, Amazon SQS, Red Hat AMQ, Anypoint MQ and PubSub+ Event Broker, whereas Aurea CX Messenger is most compared with TIBCO Enterprise Message Service, Mule ESB and WSO2 Enterprise Integrator. See our Apache Kafka vs. Aurea CX Messenger 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.