Apache Kafka vs. webMethods Business Process Management Suite (BPMS)

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.

Where webMethods Business Process Management Suite (BPMS) is well suited is for any use case where there is a business process that can executed over a long period of time (days rather than seconds) and that traverses multiple business applications and/or multiple lines of business and requires manual input from end users to approve or action specific steps. It is not well-suited for any business processes that can be distilled into a traditional integration solution between business applications that does not involve manual end user input, these types of uses cases will execute more efficiently on a traditional integration broker or enterprise service bus style solution.

Incentivized

• 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

• Great process design user interface and usability
• Excellent tools for monitoring processes at runtime
• Business rules can be managed and updated by non-technical resources

Incentivized

• 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

• Pricing is opaque and higher than we'd like
• Some of the user interfaces are outdated and looking their age
• Require buy in from business to achieve return on investment

Incentivized

Kafka is quickly becoming core product of the organization, indeed it is replacing older messaging systems. No better alternatives found yet

Incentivized

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

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

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

We found webMethods Business Process Management Suite (BPMS) to be the most feature complete product in the BPM market when we evaluated it against other products available in the market. It provides the most features, the easiest to use process design and simulation tools, and the most efficient runtime process and rules engine. Just be aware that its pricing reflects this position in the market, but you get what you pay for.

Incentivized

• 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

• Initial adoption of BPMS was slow and required buy in from the business, which was only achieved through upper management buy in applying KPIs down the line
• Once a critical mass of business processes being automated with BPMS is reached, any processes that remain manual will stand out like a sore thumb and the business will be invested to automate those remaining processes too, so adoption of BPMS is like a slow snowball effect
• Not requiring technical resources such as developer to design and build out processes is a pipe dream and impossible to realise. You will always need experts in the automation tools you apply in your organisation, and webMethods BPMS is no exception

Incentivized