Apache Camel vs. Apache Kafka

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Apache Camel
Score 6.5 out of 10
N/A
Apache Camel is an open source integration platform.N/A
Apache Kafka
Score 8.5 out of 10
N/A
Apache Kafka is an open-source stream processing platform developed by the Apache Software Foundation written in Scala and Java. The Kafka event streaming platform is used by thousands of companies for high-performance data pipelines, streaming analytics, data integration, and mission-critical applications.N/A
Pricing
Apache CamelApache Kafka
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Apache CamelApache Kafka
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Apache CamelApache Kafka
Considered Both Products
Apache Camel
Chose Apache Camel
working with Apache's TomCat server, our developer found it most easy given the UI of Camel to perform integration and data processing tasks. when compared to the other two softwares they felt the need to learn new tools outside of Apache family can be avoided and with kafka, …
Apache Kafka

No answer on this topic

Top Pros
Top Cons
Best Alternatives
Apache CamelApache Kafka
Small Businesses

No answers on this topic

No answers on this topic

Medium-sized Companies
Anypoint Platform
Anypoint Platform
Score 8.1 out of 10
IBM MQ
IBM MQ
Score 9.0 out of 10
Enterprises
TIBCO B2B Integration Solution
TIBCO B2B Integration Solution
Score 8.0 out of 10
IBM MQ
IBM MQ
Score 9.0 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Apache CamelApache Kafka
Likelihood to Recommend
7.8
(11 ratings)
8.3
(18 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
-
(0 ratings)
9.0
(2 ratings)
Usability
-
(0 ratings)
10.0
(1 ratings)
Support Rating
-
(0 ratings)
8.4
(4 ratings)
User Testimonials
Apache CamelApache Kafka
Likelihood to Recommend
Apache
Message brokering across different systems, with transactionality and the ability to have fine tuned control over what happens using Java (or other languages), instead of a heavy, proprietary languages. One situation that it doesn't fit very well (as far as I have experienced) is when your workflow requires significant data mapping. While possible when using Java tooling, some other visual data mapping tools in other integration frameworks are easier to work with.
Read full review
Apache
Apache Kafka is well-suited for most data-streaming use cases. Amazon Kinesis and Azure EventHubs, unless you have a specific use case where using those cloud PaAS for your data lakes, once set up well, Apache Kafka will take care of everything else in the background. Azure EventHubs, is good for cross-cloud use cases, and Amazon Kinesis - I have no real-world experience. But I believe it is the same.
Read full review
Pros
Apache
  • Camel has an easy learning curve. It is fairly well documented and there are about 5-6 books on Camel.
  • There is a large user group and blogs devoted to all things Camel and the developers of Camel provide quick answers and have also been very quick to patch Camel, when bugs are reported.
  • Camel integrates well with well known frameworks like Spring, and other middleware products like Apache Karaf and Servicemix.
  • There are over 150 components for the Camel framework that help integrate with diverse software platforms.
  • Camel is also good for creating microservices.
Read full review
Apache
  • Really easy to configure. I've used other message brokers such as RabbitMQ and compared to them, Kafka's configurations are very easy to understand and tweak.
  • Very scalable: easily configured to run on multiple nodes allowing for ease of parallelism (assuming your queues/topics don't have to be consumed in the exact same order the messages were delivered)
  • Not exactly a feature, but I trust Kafka will be around for at least another decade because active development has continued to be strong and there's a lot of financial backing from Confluent and LinkedIn, and probably many other companies who are using it (which, anecdotally, is many).
Read full review
Cons
Apache
  • didn't work well when our developers tried to transform heavy data sets
  • Apache Camel's whole logic is based on java so team needs to have a great skill set in java
  • if there are a handful of workflows then Apache Camel's full potential can't be realized
Read full review
Apache
  • Sometimes it becomes difficult to monitor our Kafka deployments. We've been able to overcome it largely using AWS MSK, a managed service for Apache Kafka, but a separate monitoring dashboard would have been great.
  • Simplify the process for local deployment of Kafka and provide a user interface to get visibility into the different topics and the messages being processed.
  • Learning curve around creation of broker and topics could be simplified
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
Apache
No answers on this topic
Apache
Kafka is quickly becoming core product of the organization, indeed it is replacing older messaging systems. No better alternatives found yet
Read full review
Usability
Apache
No answers on this topic
Apache
Apache Kafka is highly recommended to develop loosely coupled, real-time processing applications. Also, Apache Kafka provides property based configuration. Producer, Consumer and broker contain their own separate property file
Read full review
Support Rating
Apache
No answers on this topic
Apache
Support for Apache Kafka (if willing to pay) is available from Confluent that includes the same time that created Kafka at Linkedin so they know this software in and out. Moreover, Apache Kafka is well known and best practices documents and deployment scenarios are easily available for download. For example, from eBay, Linkedin, Uber, and NYTimes.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
Apache
If you are looking for a Java-based open source low cost equivalent to webMethods or Azure Logic Apps, Apache Camel is an excellent choice as it is mature and widely deployed, and included in many vendored Java application servers too such as Redhat JBoss EAP. Apache Camel is lacking on the GUI tooling side compared to commercial products such as webMethods or Azure Logic Apps.
Read full review
Apache
I used other messaging/queue solutions that are a lot more basic than Confluent Kafka, as well as another solution that is no longer in the market called Xively, which was bought and "buried" by Google. In comparison, these solutions offer way fewer functionalities and respond to other needs.
Read full review
Return on Investment
Apache
  • Very fast time to market in that so many components are available to use immediately.
  • Error handling mechanisms and patterns of practice are robust and easy to use which in turn has made our application more robust from the start, so fewer bugs.
  • However, testing and debugging routes is more challenging than working is standard Java so that takes more time (less time than writing the components from scratch).
  • Most people don't know Camel coming in and many junior developers find it overwhelming and are not enthusiastic to learn it. So finding people that want to develop/maintain it is a challenge.
Read full review
Apache
  • Positive: Get a quick and reliable pub/sub model implemented - data across components flows easily.
  • Positive: it's scalable so we can develop small and scale for real-world scenarios
  • Negative: it's easy to get into a confusing situation if you are not experienced yet or something strange has happened (rare, but it does). Troubleshooting such situations can take time and effort.
Read full review
ScreenShots