ActiveMQ vs IronMQ: What are the differences?
Developers describe ActiveMQ as "A message broker written in Java together with a full JMS client". 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. On the other hand, IronMQ is detailed as "Message Queue for any deployment". An easy-to-use highly available message queuing service. Built for distributed cloud applications with critical messaging needs. Provides on-demand message queuing with advanced features and cloud-optimized performance.
ActiveMQ and IronMQ can be categorized as "Message Queue" tools.
"Open source" is the primary reason why developers consider ActiveMQ over the competitors, whereas "Great Support" was stated as the key factor in picking IronMQ.
ActiveMQ is an open source tool with 1.5K GitHub stars and 1.05K GitHub forks. Here's a link to ActiveMQ's open source repository on GitHub.
According to the StackShare community, ActiveMQ has a broader approval, being mentioned in 33 company stacks & 17 developers stacks; compared to IronMQ, which is listed in 9 company stacks and 5 developer stacks.
What is ActiveMQ?
What is IronMQ?
Want advice about which of these to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Sign up to add, upvote and see more prosMake informed product decisions
What are the cons of using ActiveMQ?
Sign up to get full access to all the companiesMake informed product decisions
Sign up to get full access to all the tool integrationsMake informed product decisions
I deploy to Heroku. However, my applications require full linux applications that cannot be deployed to Heroku. I deploy them to Rackspace.
Then Heroku and Rackspace communicate over IronMQ. Problem solved.