ActiveMQ vs VMware Tanzu Data Solutions comparison

Apache and VMware are both solutions in the Message Queue (MQ) Software category. Apache is ranked #2 with an average rating of 8.1, while VMware is ranked #5 with an average rating of 8.3. Apache holds a 26.2% mindshare in MQ, compared to VMware’s 4.5% mindshare. Additionally, 89% of Apache users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 89% of VMware users who would recommend it.

ActiveMQ

Read 28 ActiveMQ reviews

6,175 Views
5,681 Comparison Views

89% willing to recommend

VMware Tanzu Data Solutions

Read 83 VMware Tanzu Data Solutions reviews

3,578 Views
1,682 Comparison Views

89% willing to recommend

ActiveMQ

VMware Tanzu Data Solutions

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 27, 2025

VMware Tanzu Data Solutions and ActiveMQ are both open-source tools catering to different IT needs. VMware Tanzu leads in database performance and analytics, while ActiveMQ stands out in messaging and ease of use.

Features: VMware Tanzu excels with high performance, scalability, and integration with Hadoop and Big Data. Its robust parallel processing capabilities make it extremely efficient for analytics. ActiveMQ is notable for message queuing, providing features like message persistence, clustering, and support for multiple protocols.

Room for Improvement: VMware Tanzu could improve stability and integration features, and simplify complex administrative tasks. ActiveMQ can refine clustering capabilities, improve its monitoring console, and enhance documentation and support for additional protocols.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: VMware Tanzu offers hybrid and public cloud deployment options, with customer service varying in quality. ActiveMQ is mainly deployed on-premises, with support that is generally robust but often reliant on community forums.

Pricing and ROI: Both VMware Tanzu and ActiveMQ are cost-effective due to their open-source nature. VMware Tanzu's paid features offer flexibility and value for advanced functionalities, whereas ActiveMQ's affordability remains appealing, providing significant functionality at no cost.

To learn more, read our detailed ActiveMQ vs. VMware Tanzu Data Solutions Report (Updated: July 2025).

Buyer's Guide

ActiveMQ vs. VMware Tanzu Data Solutions

July 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 865,164 peers since 2012

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

ActiveMQ

Ranking in Message Queue (MQ) Software

2nd

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

VMware Tanzu Data Solutions

Ranking in Message Queue (MQ) Software

5th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Database Development and Management (6th), Relational Databases Tools (12th), Data Warehouse (6th)

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Message Queue (MQ) Software category, the mindshare of ActiveMQ is 26.2%, up from 23.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of VMware Tanzu Data Solutions is 4.5%, down from 10.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Message Queue (MQ) Software

Q&A Highlights

Miriam Tover

Service Delivery Manager at PeerSpot

Jun 27, 2019

What is the biggest difference between ActiveMQ and RabbitMQ?

RabbitMQ has a larger installed base and more active OSS community.

See all answers

Featured Reviews

Eyob Alemu

Technical Director at NIDP

Efficient data flow management with high performance and occasional stability improvements

For high traffic volumes where management time on ActiveMQ is minimal and where the rate of flow from the provider is slower than from the consumer, ActiveMQ offers the highest performance based on our experience. It has been efficient for data flow control between two endpoints, despite occasional unexpected glitches. I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

Read full review

Sushma Polavarapu

Sr Data Analytics Consultant at Capgemini

Create essential reporting scripts with simplicity but has some operational challenges

We mainly create functions and scripts required for reporting The product is not complex; I do not have to create stored procedures, functions, or views. It's just simple to use. There is general room for improvement. I have been using it for five years. I have faced stability issues, mainly…

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It provides the best support services."

"There is a vibrant community, and it is one of the strongest points of this product. We always get answers to our problems. So, my experience with the community support has been good."

"I am impressed with the tool’s latency. Also, the messages in ActiveMQ wait in a queue. The messages will start to move when the system reopens after getting stuck."

"The main function I find valuable in ActiveMQ is facilitating message transfer within the client's internal network. ActiveMQ handles the message transfer from the internal network to the cloud. Regarding multi-protocols, we use different approaches based on client capabilities. Some clients connect for real-time data transfer, using database queries for periodic updates every ten minutes. We collect data from multiple clients, ensuring we get real-time sensor values where possible and periodic updates for others."

"The ability to store the failed events for some time is valuable."

"ActiveMQ brings the most value to small applications because it will not cost you very much to complete."

"For reliable messaging, the most valuable feature of ActiveMQ for us is ensuring prompt message delivery."

"Reliable message delivery and mirroring."

More ActiveMQ pros

"Reliability for the messages is key. RabbitMQ ensures your messages are safe. They are not deleted and stuff."

"Pivotal Greenplum's shared-nothing architecture."

"RabbitMQ will help to remove a lot of the complexities and create a loosely coupled codebase."

"We have been able to set up a messaging system that facilitates data integration between the software modules that we sell."

"Scalable (Massive) Parallel Processing (MPP) – The ability to bring to bear large amounts of compute against large data sets with Greenplum and the EMC DCA has proven itself to be very effective."

"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. It works on common commodity hardware. You can use any type of server. You don't need to have proprietary hardware. It's fairly flexible."

"The solution is stable."

"It's super easy to deploy and it also supports different languages and analytics."

Cons

"Message Management: Better management of the messages. Perhaps persist them, or put in another queue with another life cycle."

"AI capabilities require improvement in future updates."

"From the TPS point of view, it's like 100,000 transactions that need to be admitted from different devices and also from the different minor small systems. Those are best fit for Kafka. We have used it on the customer side, and we thought of giving a try to ActiveMQ, but we have to do a lot of performance tests and approval is required before we can use it for this scale."

"The clustering for sure needs improvement. When we were using it, the only thing available was an active/passive relationship that had to be maintained via shared file storage. That model includes a single point of failure in that storage medium."

"Distributed message processing would be a nice addition."

"The solution can improve the other protocols to equal the AMQ protocol they offer."

"The solution's stability needs improvement."

"Needs to focus on a certain facet and be good at it, instead of handling support for most of the available message brokers."

More ActiveMQ cons

"They should improve on the ability to scale your queues in a very simple and elegant way with the same power that they have would be great."

"We needed to configure additional plugins. While it was relatively easy to do this on-premises, it became more challenging in the cloud."

"VMware RabbitMQ's configuration process could be easier to understand."

"Tanzu Greenplum's compression for GPText could be made more efficient."

"The product is pretty hard to configure."

"Initial setup is a little complex. It took around two weeks to deploy."

"The installation is difficult and should be made easier."

"There are some security concerns that have been raised with this product."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It’s open source, ergo free."

"There are no fees because it is open-source."

"We use the open-source version."

"We are using the open-source version, so we have not looked at any pricing."

"I think the software is free."

"I use open source with standard Apache licensing."

"The tool's pricing is reasonable and competitive compared to other solutions."

"ActiveMQ is open source, so it is free to use."

More ActiveMQ pricing and cost advice

"It is an open-source platform. Although, we have to pay for additional features."

"The solution's pricing is cost-effective as it does not involve significant expenses. Licensing is required only for the server, while clients do not need any licensing. Therefore, it proves to be a cost-efficient option."

"The pricing is okay."

"On a scale of one to five, with five being the most competitive pricing, I would rate this solution as a four."

"It’s an open-source solution."

"We are using the open-source version of this solution."

"It is the best product with best fit for price/performance customer objectives."

"This is an open source solution."

More VMware Tanzu Data Solutions pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Message Queue (MQ) Software solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

865,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

33%

Computer Software Company

10%

Manufacturing Company

Government

Financial Services Firm

24%

Computer Software Company

14%

Manufacturing Company

Retailer

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about ActiveMQ?

For reliable messaging, the most valuable feature of ActiveMQ for us is ensuring prompt message delivery.

See all answers

What needs improvement with ActiveMQ?

Pricing is something to consider with ActiveMQ, though cloud pricing is not costly and depends upon the compute selection. Focusing on AI is essential nowadays. AI capabilities require improvement ...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for ActiveMQ?

In my current organization, I'm only working with ActiveMQ. I previously worked with IBM WebSphere MQ.

See all answers

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...

See all answers

What do you like most about VMware RabbitMQ?

RabbitMQ provides access to SDKs for development and the ability to raise and log tickets if we encounter issues. We can integrate RabbitMQ using various languages like Java or Python using the pro...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for VMware RabbitMQ?

The product is free of cost.

See all answers

Comparisons

IBM MQ vs ActiveMQ

Compared 50% of the time

Red Hat AMQ vs ActiveMQ

Compared 17% of the time

MuleSoft Anypoint Platform vs ActiveMQ

Compared 10% of the time

Amazon SQS vs ActiveMQ

Compared 6% of the time

PubSub+ Platform vs ActiveMQ

Compared 4% of the time

More ActiveMQ Competitors

IBM MQ vs VMware Tanzu Data Solutions

Compared 16% of the time

Oracle Exadata vs VMware Tanzu Data Solutions

Compared 11% of the time

Red Hat AMQ vs VMware Tanzu Data Solutions

Compared 8% of the time

Apache Kafka vs VMware Tanzu Data Solutions

Compared 7% of the time

MuleSoft Anypoint Platform vs VMware Tanzu Data Solutions

Compared 6% of the time

More VMware Tanzu Data Solutions Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

ActiveMQ

August 2025

Download ActiveMQ product report

Buyer's Guide

VMware Tanzu Data Solutions

July 2025

Download VMware Tanzu Data Solutions product report

Also Known As

AMQ

Greenplum, Pivotal Greenplum, VMware RabbitMQ, VMware Tanzu GemFire, VMware Postgres

Overview

Apache ActiveMQ is the most popular and powerful open source messaging and Integration Patterns server.

Apache ActiveMQ is fast, supports many Cross Language Clients and Protocols, comes with easy to use Enterprise Integration Patterns and many advanced features while fully supporting JMS 1.1 and J2EE 1.4. Apache ActiveMQ is released under the Apache 2.0 License

Apache

VMware Tanzu is a robust platform tailored for data warehousing, complex analytics, BI applications, and predictive analytics. It excels in scalability, performance, and parallel processing, enhancing data handling efficiency. Users report significant productivity improvements and streamlined operations, making it ideal for comprehensive data solutions.

VMware

Sample Customers

University of Washington, Daugherty Systems, CSC, STG Technologies, Inc.

General Electric, Conversant, China CITIC Bank, Aridhia, Purdue University

Buyer's Guide

ActiveMQ vs. VMware Tanzu Data Solutions

July 2025

Free Report: ActiveMQ vs. VMware Tanzu Data Solutions

Find out what your peers are saying about ActiveMQ vs. VMware Tanzu Data Solutions and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

865,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our ActiveMQ vs. VMware Tanzu Data Solutions report.

See our list of best Message Queue (MQ) Software vendors.

We monitor all Message Queue (MQ) Software reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.