ActiveMQ vs VMware Tanzu Data Solutions comparison

Apache and VMware are both solutions in the Message Queue (MQ) Software category. Apache is ranked #2 with an average rating of 8.0, while VMware is ranked #5 with an average rating of 8.1. Apache holds a 26.2% mindshare in MQ, compared to VMware’s 5.9% mindshare. Additionally, 88% of Apache users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 89% of VMware users who would recommend it.

ActiveMQ

Read 26 ActiveMQ reviews

7,395 Views
4,507 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

VMware Tanzu Data Solutions

Read 83 VMware Tanzu Data Solutions reviews

2,538 Views
2,042 Comparison Views

89% willing to recommend

ActiveMQ

VMware Tanzu Data Solutions

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 27, 2025

VMware Tanzu Data Solutions and ActiveMQ are both open-source tools catering to different IT needs. VMware Tanzu leads in database performance and analytics, while ActiveMQ stands out in messaging and ease of use.

Features: VMware Tanzu excels with high performance, scalability, and integration with Hadoop and Big Data. Its robust parallel processing capabilities make it extremely efficient for analytics. ActiveMQ is notable for message queuing, providing features like message persistence, clustering, and support for multiple protocols.

Room for Improvement: VMware Tanzu could improve stability and integration features, and simplify complex administrative tasks. ActiveMQ can refine clustering capabilities, improve its monitoring console, and enhance documentation and support for additional protocols.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: VMware Tanzu offers hybrid and public cloud deployment options, with customer service varying in quality. ActiveMQ is mainly deployed on-premises, with support that is generally robust but often reliant on community forums.

Pricing and ROI: Both VMware Tanzu and ActiveMQ are cost-effective due to their open-source nature. VMware Tanzu's paid features offer flexibility and value for advanced functionalities, whereas ActiveMQ's affordability remains appealing, providing significant functionality at no cost.

To learn more, read our detailed ActiveMQ vs. VMware Tanzu Data Solutions Report (Updated: March 2025).

Buyer's Guide

ActiveMQ vs. VMware Tanzu Data Solutions

March 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 839,422 peers since 2012

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Categories and Ranking

ActiveMQ

Ranking in Message Queue (MQ) Software

2nd

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

VMware Tanzu Data Solutions

Ranking in Message Queue (MQ) Software

5th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Database Development and Management (7th), Relational Databases Tools (10th), Data Warehouse (7th)

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2025, in the Message Queue (MQ) Software category, the mindshare of ActiveMQ is 26.2%, up from 20.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of VMware Tanzu Data Solutions is 5.9%, down from 12.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Message Queue (MQ) Software

Q&A Highlights

Miriam Tover

Service Delivery Manager at PeerSpot

Jun 27, 2019

What is the biggest difference between ActiveMQ and RabbitMQ?

RabbitMQ has a larger installed base and more active OSS community.

See all answers

Featured Reviews

Prashant-Sharma

Senior Software Engineer at a retailer with 10,001+ employees

Allows for asynchronous communication, enabling services to operate independently but issues with stability

The feature of ActiveMQ which I feel is good is its ability to have DLP, the later queues. If something goes wrong with the platform, it retries. Even if it fails, it goes to DLP, and later we can rescan the same event for processing. The ability to store the failed events for some time is valuable.

Read full review

Sushma Polavarapu

Sr Data Analytics Consultant at Capgemini

Create essential reporting scripts with simplicity but has some operational challenges

We mainly create functions and scripts required for reporting The product is not complex; I do not have to create stored procedures, functions, or views. It's just simple to use. There is general room for improvement. I have been using it for five years. I have faced stability issues, mainly…

Read full review

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros

"The initial setup is straightforward and only takes a few minutes."

"The most valuable feature of this solution is the holding and forwarding."

"It’s a JMS broker, so the fact that it can allow for asynchronous communication is valuable."

"It provides the best support services."

"The main function I find valuable in ActiveMQ is facilitating message transfer within the client's internal network. ActiveMQ handles the message transfer from the internal network to the cloud. Regarding multi-protocols, we use different approaches based on client capabilities. Some clients connect for real-time data transfer, using database queries for periodic updates every ten minutes. We collect data from multiple clients, ensuring we get real-time sensor values where possible and periodic updates for others."

"Most people or many people recommended using ActiveMQ on small and medium-scale applications."

"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."

"Message broadcasting: There could be a use case sending the same message to all consumers. So as a producer, I broadcast the message to a topic. Then, whichever consumers are subscribed to the topic can consume the same message."

More ActiveMQ pros

"I like the high throughput of 20K messages/sec, and that it supports multiple protocols."

"The product is not complex."

"Tanzu Greenplum's most valuable features include the integration of modern data science approaches across an MPP platform."

"The security is great."

"The solution is stable."

"RabbitMQ provides access to SDKs for development and the ability to raise and log tickets if we encounter issues. We can integrate RabbitMQ using various languages like Java or Python using the provided SDKs."

"Some of the most valuable features are publish and subscribe, fanout, and queues."

"Scalable (Massive) Parallel Processing (MPP) – The ability to bring to bear large amounts of compute against large data sets with Greenplum and the EMC DCA has proven itself to be very effective."

Cons

"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 can improve the other protocols to equal the AMQ protocol they offer."

"This solution could improve by providing better documentation."

"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."

"There are some stability issues."

"For additional functionality, I suggest making it easier to install and monitor the queues, topics, broker status, publisher status, and consumer status. Improved monitoring tools would help avoid needing to manually access the server for monitoring purposes."

"Message Management: Better management of the messages. Perhaps persist them, or put in another queue with another life cycle."

"The solution's stability needs improvement."

More ActiveMQ cons

"The product is pretty hard to configure."

"I was struggling with installing a few things. It would be good if was somewhat similar to RedHat. There should be more documentation regarding installation troubleshooting."

"The solution needs improvement on performance."

"We would like to see Greenplum maintain a closer relationship with and parity to features implemented in PostgreSQL."

"We needed to configure additional plugins. While it was relatively easy to do this on-premises, it became more challenging in the cloud."

"Scalability issues are present. Most of our functions or jobs are queued due to that."

"Other tools besides RabbitMQ provide good TPS and HA."

"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."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I think the software is free."

"There are no fees because it is open-source."

"It’s open source, ergo free."

"We are using the open-source version, so we have not looked at any pricing."

"I use open source with standard Apache licensing."

"The tool's pricing is reasonable and competitive compared to other solutions."

"We use the open-source version."

"The solution is less expensive than its competitors."

More ActiveMQ pricing and cost advice

"This is an open source solution."

"The solution's pricing is cost-effective as it does not involve significant expenses. Licensing is required only for the server, while clients do not need any licensing. Therefore, it proves to be a cost-efficient option."

"Tanzu Greenplum's pricing is really competitive and gives excellent value for money."

"The product is available for free use since it is an open-source technology."

"The price is pretty good."

"The pricing is okay."

"Pricing is good compared to other products. It's fine."

"It’s an open-source solution."

More VMware Tanzu Data Solutions pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Message Queue (MQ) Software solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

839,422 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

34%

Computer Software Company

11%

Manufacturing Company

Government

Financial Services Firm

29%

Computer Software Company

15%

Manufacturing Company

Healthcare Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about ActiveMQ?

For reliable messaging, the most valuable feature of ActiveMQ for us is ensuring prompt message delivery.

See all answers

What needs improvement with ActiveMQ?

We need to address the non-deterministic load issues. Sometimes, ActiveMQ either restarts automatically or goes into ActiveMQ mode, causing interruptions. We need to enhance stability and improve t...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for ActiveMQ?

We have a digital ID platform that uses various services running on Kafka. There are two main endpoints where services interact with external services. These include an automatic biometric service ...

See all answers

How does IBM MQ compare with VMware RabbitMQ?

IBM MQ has a great reputation behind it, and this solution is very robust with great stability. It is easy to use, simple to configure and integrates well with our enterprise ecosystem and protocol...

See all answers

What do you like most about VMware Tanzu Greenplum?

The loading speed is very good.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for VMware Tanzu Greenplum?

It’s an open-source solution. There are no expenses for using it.

See all answers

Comparisons

IBM MQ vs ActiveMQ

Compared 51% of the time

Red Hat AMQ vs ActiveMQ

Compared 14% of the time

MuleSoft Anypoint Platform vs ActiveMQ

Compared 13% of the time

Amazon SQS vs ActiveMQ

Compared 6% of the time

EMQX vs ActiveMQ

Compared 3% of the time

More ActiveMQ Competitors

IBM MQ vs VMware Tanzu Data Solutions

Compared 18% of the time

Oracle Exadata vs VMware Tanzu Data Solutions

Compared 11% of the time

MuleSoft Anypoint Platform vs VMware Tanzu Data Solutions

Compared 9% of the time

Red Hat AMQ vs VMware Tanzu Data Solutions

Compared 8% of the time

Vertica vs VMware Tanzu Data Solutions

Compared 7% of the time

More VMware Tanzu Data Solutions Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

ActiveMQ

March 2025

Download ActiveMQ product report

Buyer's Guide

VMware Tanzu Data Solutions

February 2025

Download VMware Tanzu Data Solutions product report

Also Known As

AMQ

Greenplum, Pivotal Greenplum, VMware RabbitMQ, VMware Tanzu GemFire, VMware Postgres

Overview

Apache ActiveMQ is the most popular and powerful open source messaging and Integration Patterns server.

Apache ActiveMQ is fast, supports many Cross Language Clients and Protocols, comes with easy to use Enterprise Integration Patterns and many advanced features while fully supporting JMS 1.1 and J2EE 1.4. Apache ActiveMQ is released under the Apache 2.0 License

Apache

VMware Tanzu is a robust platform tailored for data warehousing, complex analytics, BI applications, and predictive analytics. It excels in scalability, performance, and parallel processing, enhancing data handling efficiency. Users report significant productivity improvements and streamlined operations, making it ideal for comprehensive data solutions.

VMware

Sample Customers

University of Washington, Daugherty Systems, CSC, STG Technologies, Inc.

General Electric, Conversant, China CITIC Bank, Aridhia, Purdue University

Buyer's Guide

ActiveMQ vs. VMware Tanzu Data Solutions

March 2025

Free Report: ActiveMQ vs. VMware Tanzu Data Solutions

Find out what your peers are saying about ActiveMQ vs. VMware Tanzu Data Solutions and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

839,422 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our ActiveMQ vs. VMware Tanzu Data Solutions 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.