TrustRadius: an HG Insights company

Save this comparison

Save this comparison

Add Product

Recommended Comparisons

    Overview
    ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price

    Apache Kafka

    Score8.9 out of 10
    N/AApache 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

    Azure IoT Edge

    Score8.3 out of 10
    N/AAzure IoT Edge is a fully managed service built on Azure IoT Hub. Users can deploy cloud workloads—artificial intelligence, Azure and third-party services, or business logic—to run on Internet of Things (IoT) edge devices via standard containers. The vendor states that by moving certain workloads to the edge of the network, devices spend less time communicating with the cloud, react more quickly to local changes, and operate reliably even in extended offline periods.N/A

    RabbitMQ

    Score9.5 out of 10
    N/ARabbitMQ, an open source message broker, is part of Pivotal Software, a VMware company acquired in 2019, and supports message queue, multiple messaging protocols, and more. RabbitMQ is available open source, however VMware also offers a range of commercial services for RabbitMQ; these are available as part of the Pivotal App Suite.N/A
    Pricing
    Apache KafkaAzure IoT EdgeRabbitMQ
    Editions & Modules
    No answers on this topic
    No answers on this topic
    No answers on this topic
    Offerings
    Pricing Offerings
    Apache KafkaAzure IoT EdgeRabbitMQ
    Free Trial
    NoNoNo
    Free/Freemium Version
    NoNoNo
    Premium Consulting/Integration Services
    NoNoNo
    Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup feeNo setup fee
    Additional Details
    More Pricing Information
    Community Pulse
    Apache KafkaAzure IoT EdgeRabbitMQ
    Considered Multiple Products
    Apache
    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 …
    Incentivized
    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 …
    Incentivized
    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 …
    Incentivized
    Chose Apache Kafka
    It has very minimal overhead and doesn't have a steep learning curve.
    Incentivized
    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
    Incentivized
    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 …
    Incentivized
    Chose Apache Kafka
    We had lots of problems with active mq. That is why we started using Apache Kafka.
    Incentivized
    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 …
    Incentivized
    Microsoft
    No answer on this topic
    Open Source
    Chose RabbitMQ
    RabbitMQ cannot resend messages like Apache Kafka but it seems to have the lowest latency in messages.
    Incentivized
    Chose RabbitMQ
    It is very easy to use as it has a simple function to connect and use RabbitMQ.
    It is having Fast Learning curve, Any newbies can learn it in a week or month. It is having proper documentation, we are able to find all the details about its functionality and usage of it.
    The …
    Incentivized
    Chose RabbitMQ
    Honestly, though we're still trying out Kafka and Pulsar, I'd go with them for message broker and as traffic buffers. We are only still using RabbitMQ because it's hard to transition off after writing tons of code custom-built for RabbitMQ. Kafka is better because it's way more …
    Incentivized
    Key User Insights
    Would buy again
    94%
    Would buy again
    16 Answers
    No answers on this topic
    91%
    Would buy again
    10 Answers
    Delivers good value for the price
    94%
    Delivers good value for the price
    16 Answers
    No answers on this topic
    100%
    Delivers good value for the price
    11 Answers
    Happy with the feature set
    94%
    Happy with the feature set
    16 Answers
    No answers on this topic
    91%
    Happy with the feature set
    10 Answers
    Lived up to sales and marketing promises
    100%
    Lived up to sales and marketing promises
    13 Answers
    No answers on this topic
    100%
    Lived up to sales and marketing promises
    7 Answers
    Implementation went as expected
    100%
    Implementation went as expected
    17 Answers
    No answers on this topic
    100%
    Implementation went as expected
    11 Answers
    Features
    Apache KafkaAzure IoT EdgeRabbitMQ
    Internet of Things
    Comparison of Internet of Things features of Apache Kafka and Microsoft Azure IoT Edge and RabbitMQ
    Feature
    Apache Kafka
    -
    Ratings
    Microsoft Azure IoT Edge
    8.4
    4 Ratings
    5% above category average
    RabbitMQ
    -
    Ratings
    IoT Device Management00 Ratings8.04 Ratings00 Ratings
    Device Security00 Ratings10.04 Ratings00 Ratings
    IoT Data Management00 Ratings9.04 Ratings00 Ratings
    IoT Analytics00 Ratings7.04 Ratings00 Ratings
    IoT Integration00 Ratings8.04 Ratings00 Ratings
    Best Alternatives
    Apache KafkaAzure IoT EdgeRabbitMQ
    Small Businesses
    No answers on this topic
    AWS IoT Core
    Score10 out of 10
    No answers on this topic
    Medium-sized Companies
    IBM MQ
    Score9 out of 10
    No answers on this topic
    Apache Kafka
    Score8.9 out of 10
    Enterprises
    TIBCO Messaging
    Score7.7 out of 10
    AWS IoT Core
    Score10 out of 10
    Apache Kafka
    Score8.9 out of 10
    All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
    User Ratings
    Apache KafkaAzure IoT EdgeRabbitMQ
    Likelihood to Recommend
    8.0
    (19 ratings)
    8.0
    (4 ratings)
    9.9
    (11 ratings)
    Likelihood to Renew
    9.0
    (2 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    Usability
    8.0
    (2 ratings)
    8.0
    (1 ratings)
    8.0
    (1 ratings)
    Support Rating
    8.4
    (4 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    6.5
    (4 ratings)
    User Testimonials
    Apache KafkaAzure IoT EdgeRabbitMQ
    Likelihood to Recommend
    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
    Microsoft
    Deployment of mission critical business support solutions particularly those that support virtual learning and video conferencing environments. This is because they help organisations such as the university to effectively transition to a digitally compliant organisation.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Open Source
    It is highly recommended that if you have microservices architecture and if you want to solve 2 phase commit issue, you should use RabbitMQ for communication between microservices. It is a quick and reliable mode of communication between microservices. It is also helpful if you want to implement a job and worker mechanism. You can push the jobs into RabbitMQ and that will be sent to the consumer. It is highly reliable so you won't miss any jobs and you can also implement a retry of jobs with the dead letter queue feature. It will be also helpful in time-consuming API. You can put time-consuming items into a queue so they will be processed later and your API will be quick.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Pros
    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).
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Microsoft
    • It works even if there is no internet at client location. It will record all the generated data and only send them to cloud storage when there is internet connection.
    • It allows you to bring cloud functionality down to Edge location in the form of docker container.
    • It also supports two way communication from device to cloud and vice-versa.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Open Source
    • What RabbitMQ does well is what it's advertised to do. It is good at providing lots of high volume, high availability queue. We've seen it handle upwards of 10 million messages in its queues, spread out over 200 queues before its publish/consume rates dipped. So yeah, it can definitely handle a lot of messages and a lot of queues. Depending on the size of the machine RabbitMQ is running on, I'm sure it can handle more.
    • Decent number of plugins! Want a plugin that gives you an interface to view all the queues and see their publish/consume rates? Yes, there's one for that. Want a plugin to "shovel" messages from one queue to another in an emergency? Check. Want a plugin that does extra logging for all the messages received? Got you covered!
    • Lots of configuration possibilities. We've tuned over 100 settings over the past year to get the performance and reliability just right. This could be a downside though--it's pretty confusing and some settings were hard to understand.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Cons
    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
    Microsoft
    • For some reason, the containerized architecture was also making this very hard
    • Had some issues when debugging edge modules, needs a professional grade remote debugging
    • Industrial automation still requires attention. OPC-UA was good but Modbus or custom PLCs etc was painful to set up
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Open Source
    • It breaks communication if we don't acknowledge early. In some cases our work items are time consuming that will take a time and in that scenario we are getting errors that RabbitMQ broke the channel. It will be good if RabbitMQ provides two acknowledgements, one is for that it has been received at client side and second ack is client is completed the processing part.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Likelihood to Renew
    Apache
    Kafka is quickly becoming core product of the organization, indeed it is replacing older messaging systems. No better alternatives found yet
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Microsoft
    No answers on this topic
    Open Source
    No answers on this topic
    Usability
    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
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Microsoft
    Most of the time it works perfectly, does not require any attention, but when there is a problem, it's really hard to diagnose it. I think the documentation for the positive scenarios are good on the Microsoft side, but for negative scenarios, I don't think there is enough community help out there, in my opinion.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Open Source
    RabbitMQ is very easy to configure for all supported languages (Python, Java, etc.). I have personally used it on Raspberry Pi devices via a Flask Python API as well as in Java applications. I was able to learn it quickly and now have full mastery of it. I highly recommend it for any IoT project.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Support Rating
    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.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Microsoft
    No answers on this topic
    Open Source
    I gave it a 10 but we do not have a support contract with any company for RabbitMQ so there is no official support in that regard. However, there is a community and questions asked on StackOverflow or any other major question and answer site will usually get a response.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Alternatives Considered
    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.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Microsoft
    The reason Behind this is the cost, as Microsoft provides solutions and integrations of services cheaper than AWS.
    Read full review
    Open Source
    RabbitMQ has a few advantages over Azure Service Bus 1) RMQ handles substantially larger files - ASB tops out at 100MB, we use RabbitMQfor files over 200MB 2) RabbitMQ can be easily setup on prem - Azure Service Bus is cloud only 3) RabbitMQ exchanges are easier to configure over ASB subscriptions ASB has a few advantages too 1) Cloud based - just a few mouse clicks and you're up and running
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Return on Investment
    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.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Microsoft
    • Very valuable return on investment for IT capex committed to the deployment
    • Improvements in overall organisational efficiency and agility
    • Repositioning the organisation to become digitally transformed
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Open Source
    • Positive: we don't need to keep way too many backend machines around to deal with bursts because RabbitMQ can absorb and buffer bursts long enough to let an understaffed set of backend services to catch up on processing. Hard to put a number to it but we probably save $5k a month having fewer machines around.
    • Negative: we've got many angry customers due to queues suddenly disappearing and dropping our messages when we try to publish to them afterward. Ideally, RabbitMQ should warn the user when queues expire due to inactivity but it doesn't, and due to our own bugs we've lost a lot of customer data as a result.
    • Positive: makes decoupling the web and API services from the deeper backend services easier by providing queues as an interface. This allowed us to split up our teams and have them develop independently of each other, speeding up software development.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    ScreenShots