Apache Kafka vs. Firebase

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Apache Kafka
Score 8.8 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
Firebase
Score 8.1 out of 10
N/A
Google offers the Firebase suite of application development tools, available free or at cost for higher degree of usages, priced flexibly accorded to features needed. The suite includes A/B testing and Crashlytics, Cloud Messaging (FCM) and in-app messaging, cloud storage and NoSQL storage (Cloud Firestore and Firestore Realtime Database), and other features supporting developers with flexible mobile application development.
$0.01
Per Verification
Pricing
Apache KafkaFirebase
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
Phone Authentication
$0.01
Per Verification
Stored Data
$0.18
Per GiB
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Apache KafkaFirebase
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 KafkaFirebase
Considered Both Products
Apache Kafka
Chose Apache Kafka
Apache Kafka is built for scale. From high throughput and real-time data streaming, it has a strong advantage over RabbitMQ with its low latency. This put Apache Kafka at the forefront as the platform of choice for large datasets messaging and ensuring scalability when data …
Chose Apache Kafka
It had the clustering functionality and gave tolerance against machine failure.
Chose Apache Kafka
- The biggest advantage of using Apache Kafka is that it is cloud agnostic - It handles super high volume, is fault tolerance, high performance
Chose Apache Kafka
Apache Kafka can work at a higher scale as compared to SQS. It can work with higher size per message and millions of messages per second. Moreover it can be scaled horizontally by adding more brokers to the cluster. SQS is good enough for simple use cases like making a task …
Chose Apache Kafka
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 …
Chose Apache Kafka
Apache Kafka is open-sourced, scales great has cloud agnostics and performs better than Amazon Kinesis [in my view]. Amazon Kinesis has some limitations and vendor lockin is not something I [like]. With Confluent operators you can easily install it on a kubernetes cluster.
Chose Apache Kafka
We really needed to get away from using a SQL database to act as a queue for processing records, so a new solution was needed. Kafka is a leading software application initially designed for queuing messages which is essentially what we were looking for. It has a great user …
Chose Apache Kafka
Kafka is simple and lower in price.
Chose Apache Kafka
For us, Kafka really doesn't have a 1:1 alternative. We have used ActiveMQ extensively and we still use it as a lighter option for small messages. The situation is similar with Redis - although it could be used like a Kafka alternative, we do use it just as a per-component …
Chose Apache Kafka
Apache Kafka is much more scalable and more reliable. Does not depend on memory, works well on rotational disks and that makes it a cheaper to use solution on low hardware requirements. Running multiple consumers on the same topic can also mean processing the same data again …
Chose Apache Kafka
All stack tech helps our app and system. These technologies allow us to have the data available faster between different regions (due to our particular configuration) and thus the data and processing load of each system is lower. This allows the systems to be used more …
Chose Apache Kafka
We had lots of problems with active mq. That is why we started using Apache Kafka.
Chose Apache Kafka
Kafka is not a real messaging broker implementation as RabbitMQ or TIBCO EMS/JMS are. Although it can be used as messaging, we like the idea behind the Kafka (data isn't "passing by," instead it remains centra, so the client can revisit the data if necessary). This also …
Chose Apache Kafka
Confluent Cloud is still based on Apache Kafka but it has a subscription fee so, from a long term perspective, it is wiser to deploy your own Kafka instance that spans public and private cloud. Amazon Kinesis, Google Cloud Pub/Sub do not do well for a very number of messages …
Chose Apache Kafka
I would only use RabbitMQ over Kafka when you need to have delay queues or tons of small topics/queues around.
I don't know too much about Pulsar - currently evaluating it - but it's supposed to have the same or better throughput while allowing for tons of queues. Stay tuned - I …
Chose Apache Kafka
Kafka is faster and more scalable, also "free" as opensource (albeit we deploy using a commercial distribution). Infrastructure tends to be cheaper. On the other hand, projects must adapt to Kafka APIs that sometimes change and BAU increases until a major 1.x version comes out …
Firebase
Chose Firebase
I actually only have experience with Firebase. It's for a good reason. It's the first database I worked with and just stuck with it. It's beginner friendly while offering advanced tool.
Chose Firebase
Firebase provides an event based data model with well defined pre-determined dimensions. Where I've seen the strength of other platforms is the user interface where data is analyzed. However, other platforms such as AEP also have advanced data cleansing and standardization …
Chose Firebase
Supabase is more user-friendly especially since it is directly integrated with Lovable, one of the most popular AI coder for non-technical users.
Chose Firebase
Supabase seems to have the best of all worlds right now. Followed by MongoDB/Firebase for smaller projects requiring less manpower and resources. Azure and Microsoft are reserved for existing projects and larger corporate clients.
Chose Firebase
Although there are other backend platforms that could have provided us with a solution to our project. The way of grouping the solution in FIREBASE, atomizing in the same project the database, cloud functions, authentication, push notifications, etc., has given us a clearer …
Chose Firebase
Unlike other tools in the GCP suite that have an equivalent in other clouds such as Bigquery (Athenas on AWS), AI Platform (Sagemaker), Storage (S3), we do not find an equivalent as complete as Firebase in any other provider. This is the main reason why we chose this provider …
Chose Firebase
Firebase came to a multiuse case for our product for authenticating backend services, users on the app & get data on the user base using the dashboard.
Chose Firebase
Firebase has a single NoSQL database, it is a simple, powerful and uniform application development platform in connectors, it has multiple programming languages ​​such as JavaScript and necessary tools that will simplify the creation of applications.
Chose Firebase
Firebase poses great documentation and integration with Android devices. And it's very good as well for iOS ones. So, for these scenarios, Firebase becomes the ideal ally.
Chose Firebase
It eases the app development process, has an extensive database that allows you to store media files in the cloud, supports robust uploads and downloads, and login authentication on any platform.
Chose Firebase
PostgreSQL is a relational database and is well suited for complex applications, however, Firebase is well suited for light and faster applications.
Chose Firebase
Firebase is easy to manage and scale really well for web application services. It offers better authentication and is easy to implement. For real-time analytics on web applications, it works very well. Firebase offers more features compared to other services especially it can …
Chose Firebase
  • User interface and console are very easy to understand
  • There is no pain in Integration with IOS, Android, and unity platforms
  • Cost-effective
Chose Firebase
We choose Firebase for various reasons:
  • A large set of resources and world-class Google support.
  • Pricing was a larger role in this decision.
Chose Firebase
If I get a suitable budget next year, I'll be switching us to Adobe Analytics. Their app/web tracking and the interface are streets ahead of Firebase.
Chose Firebase
Firebase is a much more comprehensive tool. While Fabric only had user traffic and trends data, it did not have the user communication set of tools. While CleverTap has CRM tools, it does not have tools for developers and product teams. While Adobe Analytics is good with …
Chose Firebase
I haven't played much with Heroku beyond deploying projects from Github. It looks to be very similar in providing a cloud-based platform for developing and deploying web apps as quickly as possible. I would look at comparing both of these before choosing a solution. I am just …
Chose Firebase
We chose Firebase for the following reasons.
  • Online resources.
  • Comes with better support.
Chose Firebase
Before using Firebase, we exclusively used self hosted database services. Using Firebase has allowed us to reduce reliance on single points of failure and systems that are difficult to scale. Additionally, Firebase is much easier to set up and use than any sort of self hosted …
Chose Firebase
Firebase does a lot of things well, but Branch.io does a lot of things great. We originally chose Firebase because it was free, had great crash reporting, and full event tracking. As we began to scale, increase paid marketing spend, and implement features such as journey …
Chose Firebase
It's tough to pick out competitors against Firebase as I'm really unsure and doubt there's another product exactly like it. As mentioned before Firebase literally does everything you can imagine for a mobile application but doesn't get insanely deep in one feature or action. It …
Chose Firebase
Firebase is well suited for projects with simpler database workloads that require its real-time features. For data that is heavily read in real time, it's a great choice and gives developers a lot of features that would have been complicated and time-consuming to build up front …
Best Alternatives
Apache KafkaFirebase
Small Businesses

No answers on this topic

Visual Studio
Visual Studio
Score 8.8 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
IBM MQ
IBM MQ
Score 9.0 out of 10
Visual Studio
Visual Studio
Score 8.8 out of 10
Enterprises
IBM MQ
IBM MQ
Score 9.0 out of 10
Visual Studio
Visual Studio
Score 8.8 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Apache KafkaFirebase
Likelihood to Recommend
8.0
(0 ratings)
7.2
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
9.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Usability
8.0
(0 ratings)
6.9
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
8.4
(0 ratings)
7.3
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Apache KafkaFirebase
Likelihood to Recommend
For brokering messages, Confluent Kafka is well suited since it offers a managed solution ready to use. Scenarios where the solution is not very well suited are for example, where pricing is an issue. The solution costs quite a lot for basic usage (for example: for 3 clusters, pricing is above 100k$ a year).
Read full review
Firebase should be your first choice if your platform is mobile first. Firebase's mobile platform support for client-side applications is second to none, and I cannot think of a comparable cross-platform toolkit. Firebase also integrates well with your server-side solution, meaning that you can plug Firebase into your existing app architecture with minimal effort.
Firebase lags behind on the desktop, however. Although macOS support is rapidly catching up, full Windows support is a glaring omission for most Firebase features. This means that if your platform targets Windows, you will need to implement the client functionality manually using Firebase's web APIs and wrappers, or look for another solution.
Read full review
Pros
  • Apache Kafka is able to handle a large number of I/Os (writes) using 3-4 cheap servers.
  • It scales very well over large workloads and can handle extreme-scale deployments (eg. Linkedin with 300 billion user events each day).
  • The same Kafka setup can be used as a messaging bus, storage system or a log aggregator making it easy to maintain as one system feeding multiple applications.
Read full review
  • Extremely robust. Has about any tool you can think of under one roof making it extremely useful as a backup platform for data analytics or small teams that need something quickly.
  • Intuitive and easy UI/UX. Being made and owned by Google, you expect nothing less. Very easy to use for anyone that has any marketing or analytical experience especially in Google Analytics (which I just assume all marketers do).
  • Safe, secure, and sturdy. Never need to worry about downtimes or misinformation as it's as clean and safe as it is being run by Google.
  • FREE! What else is there to say. Unless you're an extremely large application handling hundreds of thousands to millions of users, this pay as you go plan will stay free.
Read full review
Cons
  • The Kafka Tool is a community-made Java application that looks and feels from the past century.
  • Logging can be confusing. This certainly shows when we have to do troubleshooting.
  • Hybrid scenarios - pub/sub, but there are services in and outside a Kubernetes cluster. Then there are a ~3 options, but only 2 (the harder ones) are production-safe.
Read full review
  • Firebase/Firestore has very limited support for querying more complicated items; for example, performing a simple string search is not possible.
  • While upfront costs are low, costs can grow quickly if you're not careful about what you are being billed for.
  • Dashboards have at times shown different information to what is billed, and support from Google is less than stellar and not as effective as that from Amazon or Microsoft.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
Kafka has suited our use case very well so far. Going forward we are planning to expand our platform manifold so the load on Kafka and our reliance on Kafka is going to increase only.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Usability
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
I don't use the Firebase UI much, but rather connect it to GA4. GA4 has a great event model but the GA4 UI and analysis capabilities are limited. It's harder to measure product usage type of engagement but if you have the time and resources to leverage the GA4 to BiqQuery export you'll have all the raw event data you'll need for deep analysis, segmentation, and audience activation.
Read full review
Support Rating
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
Our analytics folks handled the majority of the communication when it came to customer service, but as far as I was aware, the support we got was pretty good. When we had an issue, we were able to reach out and get support in a timely fashion. Firebase was easy to reach and reasonably available to assist when needed.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
Apache Kafka is built for scale. From high throughput and real-time data streaming, it has a strong advantage over RabbitMQ with its low latency. This put Apache Kafka at the forefront as the platform of choice for large datasets messaging and ensuring scalability when data scale up tremendously. RabbitMQ however has its strengths in traditional messaging. Routing and message delivery reliability are the bedrock of RabbitMQ and this is where RabbitMQ excels. In my previous workplace, RabbitMQ was of choice as reliability matters more than scale. In two words. Apache Kafka for scale, RabbitMQ for reliability. And for cloud deployment and large dataset messaging in what I am doing now, Apache Kafka is the default choice.
Read full review
Before using Firebase, we exclusively used self hosted database services. Using Firebase has allowed us to reduce reliance on single points of failure and systems that are difficult to scale. Additionally, Firebase is much easier to set up and use than any sort of self hosted database. This simplicity has allowed us to try features that we might not have based on the amount of work they required in the past.
Read full review
Return on Investment
  • Positive: bursts of traffic on special holidays are easy to handle because Kafka can absorb and buffer all the messages we need to process long enough to let an understaffed set of back-end services catch up on processing. Hard to put a number to it but we probably save $5k a month having fewer machines running.
  • Positive: makes decoupling the web and API services from the deeper back-end services easier by providing topics as an interface. This allowed us to split up our teams and have them develop independently of each other, speeding up software development.
  • Negative: our engineers have made mistakes such as accidentally dropping a few thousand messages due to the CLI being confusing to use, and as a result a customer lost some of their precious data. I'd say that was more our fault than Kafka's though.
Read full review
  • Firebase has been able to help us understand reliably, the drop-off in our user flows with their funnel feature. This has made it easy for us to be able to pinpoint weaknesses in our funnel and test and optimize with data as the dependent variable.
  • From an economic standpoint, we don't pay for Firebase which is great, but as the saying goes "You get what you pay for" also holds true in this context. As we looked to grow and scale, we looked for a paid solution.
  • From a developer resource standpoint, Firebase has been extremely easy to integrate into our app. Whether it be the event tracking, dynamic links or crash reporting we have not had to waste too much developer time thanks to their well-organized developer docs.
Read full review
ScreenShots