We performed a comparison between Microsoft Azure 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 ability to easily connect back to Service Fabric is the most important for us."
"It's easy to use compared to other products. It's easy to set up."
"It is easy to use."
"The most valuable features are the API and integrations."
"The tool's most valuable feature is the integration of CI/CD with the API gateway."
"The most valuable feature is the developer portal, which has source code examples in various programming languages to help developers learn the API."
"The Application Gateway we have found to be the most useful in Microsoft Azure API Management. We have integrated the Microsoft Azure API Management with Application Gateway. Application Gateway is a type of load balancer that we are using for the high availability of our API calls."
"The integration with Azure Active Directory is a good security feature for authentication and authorization. There is multifactor authentication. You can also use all of the Azure AD features integrated with API Management."
"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."
"It is possible to solve larger legacy API issues on an enterprise level with this product."
"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."
"Using mainframe programs (not screens), the OpenLegacy services do not require any changes by the mainframe programmers, thus reducing development cycles."
"OpenLegacy produces a war file which includes everything you need to deploy a Tomcat server."
"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."
"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."
"Microsoft Azure API Management's most valuable features are the microservices we used to use. They were API callers to receive communication with the network and building system, to complete the request. The response would be through the processing system."
"This solution is only available as a cloud-based deployment and it would be very helpful to have an on-premises version."
"The solution’s security and performance could be improved."
"There is a limitation of 32 kb of data in the APIs. Having the limitation increase would be a benefit."
"The product needs to introduce a developer portal."
"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."
"The scalability of this solution could be improved. The volume which the API Management task service can handle needs to be improved. Cost wise, this solution could be optimized."
"Performance issues from this platform need to be sorted out."
"Customer support for the product is slow and not very good. It makes using the product difficult if you need help quickly."
"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."
"Debugging and logging for programmers could be better."
"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."
"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."
More Microsoft Azure API Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Microsoft Azure API Management is ranked 1st in API Management with 67 reviews while OpenLegacy is ranked 37th in API Management. Microsoft Azure API Management is rated 7.8, while OpenLegacy is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Microsoft Azure API Management writes "Efficiently manages and monetizes API ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenLegacy writes "The biggest advantage is how simple the technology was". Microsoft Azure API Management is most compared with Amazon API Gateway, Apigee, MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager, Kong Gateway Enterprise and IBM API Connect, 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.
