No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Aurea CX Messenger vs VMware Tanzu Data Solutions comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 27, 2025

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
11th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
Business Activity Monitoring (4th), Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) (13th), SOA Governance (6th), Message Oriented Middleware (MOM) (9th)
VMware Tanzu Data Solutions
Ranking in Message Queue (MQ) Software
4th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
89
Ranking in other categories
Database Development and Management (5th), Relational Databases Tools (11th), Data Warehouse (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Message Queue (MQ) Software category, the mindshare of Aurea CX Messenger is 3.7%, up from 1.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of VMware Tanzu Data Solutions is 9.7%, up from 5.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Message Queue (MQ) Software Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
VMware Tanzu Data Solutions9.7%
Aurea CX Messenger3.7%
Other86.6%
Message Queue (MQ) Software
 

Featured Reviews

Radhey Rajput - PeerSpot reviewer
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…
Karthik Shivaram - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Director 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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Easy to deploy new services."
"The solution is highly scalable, this is very important for us. It can handle a lot of messages."
"Sonic is lightweight, scalable, and does the work; easy to start, setup, and manage, and compared with Oracle much easier and cheaper."
"SDM: User-friendly tool which allows for a seamless approach to performing hotfixes, if required."
"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."
"The Messenger Broker is a really good feature."
"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 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."
"The solution improved our site reliability."
"We use VMware RabbitMQ to transfer information from one point to another."
"Large amounts of data can be moved pretty fast using the solution."
"Scalability is simple because it's an MPP database; if you need more processing power or you need more storage, you just add a few more nodes in the cluster, and it works on common commodity hardware, so you can use any type of server without needing proprietary hardware, making it fairly flexible."
"RabbitMQ helped us build a database synchronization framework that allowed us to transfer our clients data to our cloud based data processing centers."
"We chose Greenplum because of the architecture in terms of clustering databases and being able to have, or at least utilize the resources that are sitting on a database."
"Legacy queuing systems have been replaced by RabbitMQ."
"Batch processing times have dramatically decreased from over 12 hours to under three hours."
 

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."
"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"
"The solution needs to improve support for new, more recent protocols on the API."
"They should not be frequently upgrading the product version."
"The 2015 version was a nightmare at the beginning compared with 2013 version."
"You should not hurry with upgrades without testing the whole product completely."
"The improvement is that it should be on the cloud and use web services."
"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 IP addresses."
"When they are full, we might lose everything."
"The fact GreenPlum is using an older version of Postgres means developers coming from other products will find many missing features in PostgreSQL, features which you would assume are standard."
"The solution needs improvement on performance."
"The Greenplum appliance itself has had some reliability issues, so it would be great if that could be improved in the next version."
"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."
"We seem to be replacing a disk on the appliance every week."
"The initial deployment was a little difficult."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is not so high."
"Much better than Oracle SOA Suite."
"You pay nothing for licensing, because the commercial model is a subscription. Other environments, such as QA and Development, are included in the subscription"
"This is an open source solution."
"Tanzu Greenplum's pricing is really competitive and gives excellent value for money."
"It is the best product with best fit for price/performance customer objectives."
"We are using the open-source version of this solution."
"Since the tool is an open-source product, there is no need to pay anything."
"The pricing for RabbitMQ is reasonable. It is worth the cost."
"are using the open-source version, which can be used free of cost."
"It is an open-source product."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Message Queue (MQ) Software solutions are best for your needs.
912,006 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Outsourcing Company
14%
Construction Company
10%
Non Profit
8%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Outsourcing Company
15%
Construction Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business1
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise5
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business32
Midsize Enterprise11
Large Enterprise52
 

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...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for VMware Tanzu GemFire?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for VMware Tanzu Data Solutions is that it is a bit expensive.
What needs improvement with VMware Tanzu GemFire?
In terms of weak points in VMware Tanzu Data Solutions, pricing is always the root cause of people not wanting to renew licenses or do any upgrades.
 

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

 

Sample Customers

Heathrow, HomeServe, Paypal, Freedom Mortgage
General Electric, Conversant, China CITIC Bank, Aridhia, Purdue University
Find out what your peers are saying about Aurea CX Messenger vs. VMware Tanzu Data Solutions and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
912,006 professionals have used our research since 2012.