We performed a comparison between 3scale API Management and OpenLegacy based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Google, Amazon Web Services (AWS) and others in API Management."The most valuable features are the gateway and security features."
"The standard deployment is very simple."
"The product is stable."
"The gateway is the most valuable feature because it makes it possible for us to gather all traffic into one proxy, which is a good thing."
"3scale API Management's best feature is API management."
"I like the API automation."
"To me, the most valuable feature of 3scale API Management is that it lets you add a backend to the product. I also like that you can integrate it well with OpenShift clusters, making 3scale API Management a useful solution."
"It's good that they aren't adding a lot of features like ESP, etc. It's okay with just being a gateway."
"Using OpenLegacy, the exposure of services is far easier and quicker. In many cases, exposure of services requires just a few clicks and takes only minutes. In very complex cases, it still only takes half a day. Without OpenLegacy, it would take us several months to create the same services."
"OpenLegacy produces a war file which includes everything you need to deploy a Tomcat server."
"It is possible to solve larger legacy API issues on an enterprise level with this product."
"Using mainframe programs (not screens), the OpenLegacy services do not require any changes by the mainframe programmers, thus reducing development cycles."
"It is possible to connect a service to a mainframe program or back transaction in a matter of minutes or hours at the most."
"Opens the door to connect modern web products to an old legacy system."
"The biggest advantage of OpenLegacy was how simple the technology was. We were able to build out the OpenLegacy parts very quickly. We put together a couple hundred APIs in six months."
"OpenLegacy provides a way to go from the outside world to the legacy mainframe, to move the old standard application to a REST API application. New digital services can be created in a few clicks and this can be done easily by COBOL programmers."
"3scale API Management only supports restful APIs and doesn't support SOAP."
"The user experience could be better. The developer portal is too complex and hard to configure."
"What was suggested by Red Hat was a crucial part of the configuration, but when we started to ask about the supportability of this configuration, Red Hat said only some parts of the configuration would be supported."
"I believe the CMS part of it has room for improvement though. That is where you write a couple of things if you want to publish your API. It's based on liquid scripting, which doesn't seem like the obvious ones to script with."
"The product is not that flexible for developers. It's less flexible and rigid. It's not easy to make changes or customize it."
"We tried to use the portal, but we decided that it wasn't enough. The content management system (CMS) is not easy to use if you want to customize things, and it's hard to get someone who has the knowledge to work with the CMS."
"It would be helpful to improve the customization features so that the customer can do it based on their own needs."
"What I'd like to improve in 3scale API Management is its route-limiting feature. Currently, I don't know how to do that effectively on the solution, but in Kong, I know how to do it, so I would love to see route-limiting being easily done on 3scale API Management. It would also be good if there was some authentication that you could do from 3scale API Management because Kong offers that functionality out of the box. What I'd love to see in the next release of 3scale API Management is the ability to integrate more plug-ins easily onto the platform, so you'll be able to extend it, and even do customs management. If Red Hat could offer that extension where it allows the internal organization where 3scale API Management is deployed on-premise to integrate its tools on top of 3scale API Management and provide an API for that, that will make the solution very powerful."
"The pricing of the solution could be more flexible and allow for once-off payment versus annual licensing. This would be more appealing to companies in Latin America."
"We would also be more than happy if the product had the option to work in the opposite direction – the ability to consume REST/SOW services in the outer world from the mainframe."
"I'd like to see OpenLegacy develop its low-code/no-code (LCNC) solutions. They've expanded somewhat their horizons for integration beyond mainframe CICS, which is their sweet spot. They have some tooling in that area, but it's not as good as it needs to be."
"I would like to see SSL out-of-the-box. OpenLegacy certainly does SSL, but it was not the default for our use case. We are currently working with OpenLegacy to cross the SSL bridge and suspect that most users will want to do the same."
"Customer support for the product is slow and not very good. It makes using the product difficult if you need help quickly."
"Debugging and logging for programmers could be better."
Earn 20 points
3scale API Management is ranked 12th in API Management with 10 reviews while OpenLegacy is ranked 37th in API Management. 3scale API Management is rated 7.4, while OpenLegacy is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of 3scale API Management writes "Useful as it lets you add a backend to the product, it integrates well with clusters, and it has exceptional technical support, but route-limiting isn't easy to do on it". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenLegacy writes "The biggest advantage is how simple the technology was". 3scale API Management is most compared with Amazon API Gateway, Kong Gateway Enterprise, Apigee, IBM API Connect and WSO2 API Manager, whereas OpenLegacy is most compared with Kong Gateway Enterprise, IBM API Connect and MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager.
See our list of best API Management vendors.
We monitor all API Management 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.
