SwaggerHub vs TIBCO Cloud API Management comparison

"Since I started using SwaggerHub, it has had a positive impact on our organization due to better collaboration between developers and the quality assurance team, and it has reduced errors because of its automated validation."

"The tool's most valuable feature is licensing."

"You can click & play and add the notation in a human-readable form. Spotlight is also very good in the graphical design of APIs."

"One of the best features of SwaggerHub is how it allows me to create APIs and control the evolution of APIs within an organization."

"The best feature that SwaggerHub offers is the collaboration capability that helps us the most across all of our teams, as we have a single API infrastructure but several teams working in different areas of these APIs."

"It is quite a useful tool. It is quite good with the validation of the spec. It works quite well in terms of errors and conformity to the OpenAPI standard. It is better than Visual Studio Code in terms of editing."

"SwaggerHub plays a crucial role in order to bring teams and automate things faster and also reduce the man-hours and increase the work efficiency."

"The product's initial setup phase was easy and not at all difficult."

"Very few outages or SLA issues."

"It is easy to work with ."

"The most valuable feature is the ability to have different packages based on the API keys. The same core system can have different packages based on different environments."

"The most valuable aspect of Mashery is its stability."

"The solution is a good general API manager. They have a few propriety features but are offering items that are standard in the industry as well."

"It has something called packages. In that way, it's good because we have some pre-built packages. So, if you want to onboard different APIs, we can just add them to the package, and it's there."

"TIBCO Cloud API Management has brought numerous benefits for our organization, especially in product maturity and support."

"The control that we have and the security features are very valuable. With regard to API implementation or API orchestration, it works very well in the cloud because as soon as you create an API with one click, you can actually expose your APIs."

"One of the most difficult things about SwaggerHub is the user interface and its usability, as it can feel quite complex and require too many clicks for simple actions."

"Some areas of SwaggerHub that could be improved include the interface between the code editor and the visual editor, the integration with private APIs, which currently requires an upgraded account."

"At some point, we were missing some tagging of the APIs, and we could not do that."

"It has limited functionality...Unfortunately, some of its features are not what we need."

"SwaggerHub can be improved since the API testing features are limited compared to Postman, and it is somewhat expensive for small teams as paid plans cost a lot."

"The customization and doc formatting options for documentation pages are restricted in SwaggerHub."

"The review process should be improved. There seem to be some gaps, at least for us, for the editing part because we would like to have a full request review mechanism. They support some comments, but it is really hard to manage those comments. We would like to use the full request. Therefore, we are now looking to integrate with repositories. It has integration with Bitbucket and GitHub, but we have some internal constraints, and we need to move some of the repositories to GitHub. Our source code is on-premise in Bitbucket, and it was a bit of a problem for us to integrate. Now we are transitioning our repositories to GitHub, and hopefully, we can enable the integration. This will probably solve the problem with the review and approval. Its customization should also be improved. There are limitations around the support for the developer portal. There should be more customization options for the website that you can use as a developer portal. Currently, it has only Swagger UI with minimal customization. You cannot actually add additional pages and documentation for explaining concepts and general things. That's why we have started to look around to see what other tools are doing. They should also allow tagging on the API. We would like to add some tagging on the API to reflect certain things. Currently, any metadata that you would like to have has to be a part of the spec. You cannot do anything else. It should also have support for Open API 3.1, which was released at the beginning of the year. It would be great to be able to switch to that."

"It could be more intuitive compared to one of its competitors."

"TIBCO Cloud API Management should improve its installation and make it easy."

"The management console of API and customers' applications are not the most intuitive."

"Policy management has been a bit of a concern."

"Monetization is not that great in API management. You need customization. Improvements are needed with sandbox local as well as with monetization. Those features are missing."

"It's not that user-friendly, and security-wise when you try to implement the security layer on top of it, it's not that easy either."

"They can fix some stability issues and probably make it more user-friendly so that not only an IT savvy person but an end-user can also easily navigate through this solution."

"I'd like to see TIBCO integrate authentication and security features into Mashery."

"The security needs improvement, specifically, propagation of security to an API. Calling other APIs is something that is missing in the product and that makes us think about going to a competitor."

"The tool is cheap."

"It has a yearly subscription, but I am not sure."

"Licensing is quite flexible."

"Its price is pretty reasonable. There are some lightweight API options available in the market, but given the feature set that TIBCO provides, its price is really reasonable."

"TIBCO Cloud API Management is not an expensive solution."

"We have secured terms on which we have been happy to renew for a number of years."