Aurea CX Messenger vs VMware Tanzu Data Solutions comparison

Aurea and Broadcom are both solutions in the Message Queue (MQ) Software category. Aurea is ranked #12, while Broadcom is ranked #5 with an average rating of 8.6. Aurea holds a 3.0% mindshare in MQ, compared to Broadcom’s 8.4% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Aurea users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 89% of Broadcom users who would recommend it.

Aurea CX Messenger

Read 7 Aurea CX Messenger reviews

1,400 Views
378 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

VMware Tanzu Data Solutions

Read 85 VMware Tanzu Data Solutions reviews

5,902 Views
1,594 Comparison Views

89% willing to recommend

Aurea CX Messenger

VMware Tanzu Data Solutions

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 27, 2025

VMware Tanzu Data Solutions and Aurea CX Messenger are leaders in data management and message queuing, respectively. VMware's robust support and competitive pricing give it an edge in cloud environments, while Aurea provides valuable real-time features at a balanced cost.

Features: VMware Tanzu Greenplum is recognized for its Massively Parallel Processing (MPP), data compression, and a wide range of SQL and programming language support. It offers enhanced data performance with distributed architecture, vital for large datasets. Aurea CX Messenger excels in message queuing, scalable architecture, and integration with durable messaging and clustering for high availability, ideal for real-time data handling projects.

Room for Improvement: VMware Tanzu Data Solutions needs improved stability, better scaling, and enhanced Big Data integration. Issues include query result consistency and outdated PostgreSQL features, with demands for improved upgrade paths and appliance reliability. Aurea CX Messenger requires improved alerts and a modern dashboard, with users desiring streamlined configuration and better message load management in large-scale deployments.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: VMware Tanzu Data Solutions enables flexible deployment across cloud environments with robust technical support and satisfactory customer service. Its support team offers comprehensive assistance. Aurea CX Messenger focuses on on-premises deployment, with effective and reliable technical support. VMware Tanzu stands out in hybrid and multi-cloud settings due to its flexibility.

Pricing and ROI: VMware Tanzu Data Solutions uses an open-source model with competitive paid support options, supporting large deployments with valuable features. Aurea CX Messenger operates on a subscription model, including various environments without extra licensing costs, making it a cost-competitive choice over more expensive enterprise solutions.

To learn more, read our detailed Aurea CX Messenger vs. VMware Tanzu Data Solutions Report (Updated: April 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Aurea CX Messenger vs. VMware Tanzu Data Solutions

April 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 890,027 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

Aurea CX Messenger

Ranking in Message Queue (MQ) Software

12th

Average Rating

9.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.7

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Business Activity Monitoring (5th), Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) (14th), SOA Governance (6th), Message Oriented Middleware (MOM) (8th)

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 (5th), Relational Databases Tools (13th), Data Warehouse (8th)

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2026, in the Message Queue (MQ) Software category, the mindshare of Aurea CX Messenger is 3.0%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of VMware Tanzu Data Solutions is 8.4%, up from 5.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Message Queue (MQ) Software Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
VMware Tanzu Data Solutions	8.4%
Aurea CX Messenger	3.0%
Other	88.6%

Message Queue (MQ) Software

Featured Reviews

Radhey Rajput

Sr. IT Analyst at NCR Corporation

Lightweight and efficient solution

It's very good and lightweight. But, it does not provide web service communication. But it is excellent for internal connections One valuable feature is the messaging broker. If there is a disruption, it restores the messages. And when the application is running, it delivers all the messages. The…

Read full review

Karthik Shivaram

Sr. Manager at STI INFOTECH PVT LTD

Improved multi-cloud data management has simplified operations and supports seamless Kubernetes

From my perspective, the biggest challenge with VMware right now is the pricing. To be very honest, in many cases I find myself recommending alternative solutions instead of VMware. Even if those alternatives come with a bit more complexity, customers are often more willing to accept that than the current VMware pricing model. In the past, VMware used a socket-based licensing model, which was easier for customers to understand and budget for. Now the shift to a core-based licensing model has significantly increased costs for many environments, especially for organizations running modern high-core CPUs. One positive aspect of the new model is that VMware has bundled several components together. For example, earlier when deploying vSphere, customers also had to purchase vCenter separately for management. Now multiple components are packaged into a single SKU, which simplifies some aspects of procurement and deployment. While this consolidation has its benefits, the overall licensing and commercial costs remain very high. Pricing is not the only issue. I believe Broadcom also needs to reconsider its strategy in light of the current market conditions. The approach they are taking may be strategic from a business perspective, but from what I see in the field, it is leading to lost opportunities. Many customers who previously relied on VMware are now actively exploring alternative virtualization platforms. I’m not sure where this direction will ultimately lead, but based on my experience, it is already affecting adoption. Since you’ve been trying to reach me for some time—and we also had a discussion a couple of years ago—I hope this feedback helps Broadcom understand the current sentiment in the market and potentially make adjustments. Another important concern is the way features are bundled. In many cases, customers only need basic virtualization and high availability capabilities. However, the current packaging often includes additional features that they may not need. A good analogy is that if a customer only needs an entry-level car, we shouldn’t be forced to sell them a Rolls-Royce. VMware could benefit from adopting a more modular or à la carte licensing model, where customers can choose only the components they truly require. For example, if a customer only needs core virtualization functionality, they should be able to purchase just that. This would allow partners and solution providers to better align solutions with customer requirements and position VMware more competitively in the market. Another challenge I want to highlight is the pricing model based on U.S. dollars and the way multi-year licensing is handled. In many enterprise and government projects, customers prefer to commit to three-year or five-year licenses and pay the full amount upfront. However, in approximately 20% of the deals I work on, we lose opportunities because VMware only provides dollar-based pricing for the first year. When it comes to the following years, the contract requires renewals annually rather than allowing a fixed multi-year upfront payment. This approach is particularly problematic for government and public sector customers. Many of them are ready and willing to pay for three or five years in advance, but the current VMware model does not support that structure effectively. Because pricing is tied to the U.S. dollar and subject to yearly adjustments, VMware does not lock in pricing for the full term. From a customer’s perspective, this introduces uncertainty and makes procurement more complicated. Ideally, if a price is quoted—for example, $100 per year—it should remain consistent across a multi-year agreement. Customers would be comfortable committing to a five-year term if the price were fixed and predictable. Unfortunately, that flexibility is currently not available across VMware products, whether it is vSphere, VMware Tanzu solutions, or other offerings. For large enterprise environments, one-year commitments are usually not practical. Many enterprise customers prefer longer-term agreements for budgeting and procurement reasons. Even when they are willing to accept the higher cost associated with the core-based licensing model, the lack of a clear multi-year upfront option often becomes a deal-breaker.

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

"Before this, there was a separate front-end software setup for different departments in the organization, which is now clubbed together and provides a single platform for all departments functioning on different business aspects."

"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."

"The solution is highly scalable, this is very important for us. It can handle a lot of messages."

"The solution's stability is excellent; it's one of the best features, and we haven't experienced any bugs or glitches that have affected its performance."

"SDM: User-friendly tool which allows for a seamless approach to performing hotfixes, if required."

"Sonic is lightweight, scalable, and does the work; easy to start, setup, and manage, and compared with Oracle much easier and cheaper."

"My advice to anyone considering Aurea CX Messenger is just try it; from my experience, it is very easy to deploy, very easy to develop and to implement in production."

"The Messenger Broker is a really good feature."

More Aurea CX Messenger pros

"Very good and cost effective with very good customer support."

"We have been using GemFire for a Telco project, which we need process network data in real time and meanwhile access some reference data, and GemFire has done a great job, as we have managed to process over 200,000 messages per second."

"I would definitely recommend VMware Tanzu Greenplum; it's open-source and the support is great, and it's also relatively cheap compared to similar solutions."

"With VMware Tanzu Greenplum, one can make a huge database table and analyze the queries by adding in the SQL command. Some hint or command for the query goes over the multi-parallel execution."

"The technical support is exquisite."

"We have been able to set up a messaging system that facilitates data integration between the software modules that we sell."

"It's one of the fastest databases in the market. It's easy to use. From a maintenance perspective it's a good product. The segmentation, or architecture of the product is different than other databases such as Oracle. So even in 10 years, the data distribution for such segments will not affect other segments. The query performance of the product, for complex queries, is very good. It has good integration with Hadoop."

"It works very well with large database queries."

Cons

"Another issue, which again, I'm not aware if they already have because we have not updated to the latest version, but all the DevOps features would be nice to have because right now they are using their own deployment features."

"The improvement is that it should be on the cloud and use web services."

"The solution needs to improve support for new, more recent protocols on the API."

"You should not hurry with upgrades without testing the whole product completely."

"I would definitely like to see marketing for this product."

"They should not be frequently upgrading the product version."

"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."

"Aurea CX Messenger could improve by making better use of the new APIs"

More Aurea CX Messenger cons

"Implementation takes a long time."

"We had multiple issues with stability. The product tends to be highly unstable when under heavy loads."

"The support feature could benefit from some improvement in terms of accessibility and responsiveness."

"The pricing is very high. To be honest, instead of VMware products, I am pushing other products."

"Some integration with other platforms like design tools, and ETL development tools, that will enable some advanced functionality (like fully down processing, etc.) would be helpful in future releases."

"They should improve on the ability to scale your queues in a very simple and elegant way with the same power that they have would be great."

"Support for Windows systems needs to improve."

"It will be very useful if we could communicate with other database types from Greenplum (using a database link)."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"You pay nothing for licensing, because the commercial model is a subscription. Other environments, such as QA and Development, are included in the subscription"

"The pricing is not so high."

"Much better than Oracle SOA Suite."

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

"The price is pretty good."

"On a scale of one to five, with five being the most competitive pricing, I would rate this solution as a four."

"are using the open-source version, which can be used free of cost."

"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."

"It is an open-source product."

"The pricing is okay."

"It is the best product with best fit for price/performance customer objectives."

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

890,027 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Construction Company

11%

Manufacturing Company

Non Profit

Media Company

Financial Services Firm

18%

Construction Company

Outsourcing Company

Manufacturing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	1
Midsize Enterprise	1
Large Enterprise	5

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	30
Midsize Enterprise	11
Large Enterprise	49

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

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 RabbitMQ?

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 pro...

See all answers

What needs improvement with VMware RabbitMQ?

Implementing a circuit breaker scenario using RabbitMQ is complicated. This complexity arises because manual intervention is required to manage worker details and handle operations based on worker ...

See all answers

Comparisons

IBM MQ vs Aurea CX Messenger

Compared 10% of the time

Oracle SOA Suite vs Aurea CX Messenger

Compared 8% of the time

PubSub+ Platform vs Aurea CX Messenger

Compared 7% of the time

webMethods.io vs Aurea CX Messenger

Compared 7% of the time

ActiveMQ vs Aurea CX Messenger

Compared 6% of the time

More Aurea CX Messenger Competitors

Oracle Exadata vs VMware Tanzu Data Solutions

Compared 5% of the time

Nutanix Database Service vs VMware Tanzu Data Solutions

Compared 5% of the time

ActiveMQ vs VMware Tanzu Data Solutions

Compared 4% of the time

Snowflake vs VMware Tanzu Data Solutions

Compared 4% of the time

IBM MQ vs VMware Tanzu Data Solutions

Compared 4% of the time

More VMware Tanzu Data Solutions Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Business Activity Monitoring

April 2026

Download Aurea CX Messenger product report

Buyer's Guide

VMware Tanzu Data Solutions

March 2026

Download VMware Tanzu Data Solutions product report

Also Known As

CX Messenger Enterprise, Aurea Sonic ESB, Aurea Sonic, Aurea Sonic MQ

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

Overview

CX Messenger lets your technology keep pace with your business. Aurea’s industry leading Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) lets you adapt and change your infrastructure with plug-and-play speed and ease.

Aurea

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.

Broadcom

Sample Customers

Heathrow, HomeServe, Paypal, Freedom Mortgage

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

Buyer's Guide

Aurea CX Messenger vs. VMware Tanzu Data Solutions

April 2026

Free Report: Aurea CX Messenger vs. VMware Tanzu Data Solutions

Find out what your peers are saying about Aurea CX Messenger vs. VMware Tanzu Data Solutions and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

890,027 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Aurea CX Messenger 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.