"Good interface, intuitive solution."
"The most valuable features are the ease of use and it is a platform that has self-enablement for the customers to be able to register themselves."
"We're pretty much using all of the monetizations features out of the API manager so we can put up a portal and have a dev portal and then a prod portal and do rate limiting."
"I like the stability and the ease of use."
"Initial setup was quite easy."
"Allows the possibility of VPN technology to connect your gateway directly with on-prem services"
"The initial setup is not that complex, but there are certain challenges."
"This solution is very flexible, and it's very compatible with the other Azure products."
"It's very well integrated with the Azure environment."
"Lacks an integrated billing feature."
"They should improve the inbuilt policies that they have and that should properly create a deployment architecture as well."
"In terms of improvement, it would be helpful if they could develop an on-premises option."
"In the API you need to delete the suffix. It is annoying that you need to have a suffix. We can add a suffix at the API level, not at the operation level, and that could be improved on."
"From my understanding, there are some constraints around governance and service-to-service intercommunication managing priorities and our own governance."
"If I compare this solution to others I have used in other phases of my life, having APIM being an Azure resource, it is easy to configure and deploy. However, this conversely reduced the flexibility. The difficulty is how do we configure it in a manner that a larger enterprise would probably want it to be. This creates a bit more complexity, working around the constraints of the resource itself. If comparing it to other solutions, it is more of a legacy design with an older approach. The various level components are still around resembling an on-premise type of design similar to other solutions, such as Apigee or Mulesoft. They are still predominantly carrying some legacy design. Which might be suited for organizations where they have a more complex network layout. APIM is easy to deploy, but on the other side of that, it is constrained to how Azure has designed it to be."
"They're trying to implement versioning and trying to be able to manage different versions of your API all at the same time, but they're not doing that just quite right yet."
"The licensing fees should be cheaper."
"This solution is only available as a cloud-based deployment and it would be very helpful to have an on-premises version."
More Microsoft Azure API Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Akana API Management is ranked 24th in API Management with 1 review while Microsoft Azure API Management is ranked 2nd in API Management with 19 reviews. Akana API Management is rated 7.0, while Microsoft Azure API Management is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Akana API Management writes "Intuitive solution with good interface; currently lacks an integrated billing feature". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Azure API Management writes "Easy to use API management with a platform that allows customers to register themselves". Akana API Management is most compared with Apigee, Mulesoft Anypoint API Manager, Amazon API Gateway, SwaggerHub and Tyk, whereas Microsoft Azure API Management is most compared with Apigee, Mulesoft Anypoint API Manager, Amazon API Gateway, Kong Enterprise and IBM API Connect.
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.
