IBM API Connect Reviews

We have implemented this product in different domains, such as insurance and banking. 

It's quite flexible and easy to deploy, especially for beginners. It has almost all the features that an API gateway should have.

The only disadvantage I can see is that it requires heavy hardware support, which can be considered quite expensive.

In terms of new functionality, I think the analytics can be improved in V10. The analytics feature was better in the older version, 2.18. But in V10, it's not as flexible. When exporting analytics as KSP or JSON, it's not well formatted. They can work on enhancing the analytics part. Additionally, they can focus on reducing the hardware cost.

I have been working on IBM API Connect for the last six years. I am using V10. 

It's very stable. Previous versions were not as stable, but now, starting from 2018, I can see that the product is very stable. I would rate it a ten out of ten.

It is scalable. I would rate it a ten out of ten. Any number of users can utilize the solution. All of our clients are enterprise clients.

So far, whatever the PMR I have raised, IBM has given a solution that may be complicated, and it might take time, but in the end, we got the correct solution. The response time can be improved. 

Positive

I also have experience with Red Hat 3scale API gateway.

IBM API Connect is much much better. In terms of features, there are some limitations with 3scale. Additionally, the support for Red Hat 3scale is not as good. Even the documentation provided by Red Hat is not as comprehensive as IBM's strong documentation. If you're a beginner developer and referring to the IBM Knowledge Center, you can easily develop your API, but that's not the case with Red Hat. Red Hat's documentation is still not as mature as IBM's.

The initial setup is quite easy. The deployment of the environment and the solution itself is quite easy. The deployment itself can be done in a few minutes. Let's say 30 minutes for deployment and 30 more minutes for configuration. Within one hour, your environment is ready.

One person is more than enough for the deployment.

The pricing for 3scale is definitely cheaper. However, for enterprise-level projects, we don't recommend 3scale. If the client is medium or small and requires a basic API proxy or minimal transformation, we propose Red Hat. But for big, mature clients with complex solutions, we recommend IBM API Connect.

The pricing for us on a yearly basis. But currently, IBM API Connect also provides it as a cloud service, where you pay as you use it. That provision is also available. Only the license is covered. There are no hidden costs or extra charges.

I would suggest that if you're looking for stability and excellent performance for your API gateway, you should definitely choose IBM API Connect.

Overall, I would rate it as a ten.

Our use cases for IBM API Connect include the banking sector, where they use the solution to integrate with third parties, so all of the third-party connectivity for the banks happen through IBM API Connect.

We also built the government service website, for example, e-Government services, and the government published all services between the government entities and the businesses, so there are two connections: government to government and government to business. All the services and entities were published and consumed through the IBM API Connect gateway.

What's best about IBM API Connect is the excellent administration. The development tool that builds the API is also very simple, and user-friendly, and it doesn't consume too much time.

Another valuable feature in IBM API Connect is its good reporting feature, particularly for operations, but the most valuable feature of the solution for the customer is security. IBM API Connect provides a DMZ and a security gateway between the external and internal environment, so you can publish your API safely.

IBM API Connect can also integrate with any tool or middleware that works on open standards without the need for development or coding, so integration with the solution is easier.

Technically, I haven't faced any issues or areas for improvement in IBM API Connect. There wasn't any concern that the customer asked that we couldn't resolve or achieve. I'll need to check with the technical team if there was any issue with the solution, but from the top of my head, I haven't faced anything that the customer requested or anything that needs enhancement in IBM API Connect.

The implementation of IBM API Connect is complex, as it's an enterprise solution with many components that require more than one person. It's not a single product that you work on, and this is an area for improvement, but normally, it's good.

Having a more structured model for IBM API Connect support is also room for improvement that would help customers better.

I've been working with IBM API Connect for the last five years.

IBM API Connect is a stable solution. It's used in government services, and my team barely receives calls about the solution. IBM API Connect is also used in major banks here in Jordan, and it's stable. There are no complaints about it.

IBM API Connect is a scalable solution. It's deployed based on the Hybrid Entitlement model in IBM which gives the customers five million API calls per month, and if the customers need more, it's just a matter of buying an additional license to make it ten million API calls per month, so customers can build any environment that meets requirements and do production HADR tests without paying a lot more for the license.

As IBM API Connect is subscription-based, it's good, and it allows customers to scale as much as needed without exceeding the number of API calls. Most of the customers do not reach that limit anyway. If a customer needs to go beyond the limit, he can get a CPU-based license, but at the moment, I haven't had any customer who needs a CPU-based implementation of IBM API Connect.

The technical support for IBM, in general, isn't the best. You'll need to understand the internal setup of IBM or you need to have a partner who understands the IBM setup to get the best support from IBM. There's a program that IBM offers, the AVP, where a consultant is set aside for you or the customer, and that consultant will provide support to you.

For the technical support focused specifically on IBM API Connect, the team is good. The team of engineers is responsive and knowledgeable.

We haven't worked with other solutions similar to IBM API Connect, but we're considering another alternative from Open Source, though we haven't decided which product we want to work with.

The initial setup for IBM API Connect wasn't complex, but for the new model or the containerized model, the setup for the three nodes or containerization wasn't as easy as the normal on-premise setup or the traditional way of implementation, so the first time my company implemented the new model, it was complex. The complexity wasn't because of IBM API Connect, but it was because of the RedHat OpenShift platform beneath it, though after my team did it once, the next implementation became easier and simpler.

The price for IBM API Connect is reasonable. It's $20,000 to $30,000 yearly for a subscription, and the pricing could vary around $40,000 per year, per subscription. Its price is reasonable for customers who have around sixty million API calls yearly for unlimited environments.

I haven't evaluated other options, but I've heard about Apigee and that it's a good solution. I've heard that Apigee is technically better than IBM API Connect, but I don't have the facts on why it's better. What I heard from the customer is that Apigee is more costly than IBM, and that customer paid hundreds of thousands of dollars in Jordan. The customer contacted my company for a POC for IBM API Connect, so it seems that the customer didn't get value from Apigee based on the money he paid.

There's also MuleSoft, but I didn't see a real implementation in Jordan where there's anything extra or different from what IBM API Connect provides, and I have no idea about MuleSoft pricing.

The Jordan government accepted IBM API Connect because of the security and stability of the solution, and in terms of project implementation, it was the best project implemented that's based on DataPower and API Connect.

I'm still working with IBM API Connect.

I'm an implementer, system integrator, and reseller of the solution.

Mostly I have mid-size and enterprise customers for IBM API Connect, though I also have small-sized customers. My customers use the solution.

Most of the customers here in Jordan prefer an on-premise deployment for IBM API Connect, but my company also has cloud implementation, one public and one private, then the rest is on-premises.

My advice to people who want to start implementing IBM API Connect is to always start small. You need to understand the value you want to gain from implementing the solution, focus on business values and achieve those, then start to grow bigger later. Don't start with a big environment when implementing IBM API Connect that wouldn't result in any business value. Starting small with real business values that will touch on business needs is good advice for anyone who wants to implement IBM API Connect.

My rating for IBM API Connect is nine out of ten because it's a good IBM product. It's one of the products you can easily sell.

We're trying to make our business available on the net so that partners can connect, and distributors can use our services.

Its speed and performance are valuable.

It's based on a little bit dated architecture. A lot of evolution has happened after that. It's an evolving field. Kong is a Kubernetes-based platform. Kong runs on Kubernetes, but all the other ones are in microservices. So, there's a lot of improvement that can be done.

I've been using it for three years.

It's stable.

It's good. There are a lot of other good products also.

We didn't access their support much.

It's pretty much straightforward. We just downloaded and installed it.

I'd rate it a six out of ten.

We use IBM API Connect for the external gateway for integration, and it is for multiple customers with the external button.

IBM API Connect is a tool that helps enterprises to build an API for an enterprise. But we use it for user experience and channel integration. We use the features of building the APIs for the experience. API is exposed to different channels like mobile channels, automatic channels, portal channels, and different channels. We use the solution's management capability to define monetization and have different plans used to control IBM API Connect. So we use the full-fledged API management tool, especially for the development, monetization, publishing, and installation parts. Also, it's all deployed on an OpenShift platform.

There are two disadvantages to the solution. Firstly, the pricing model, when compared to other open sources, is high. Secondly, the availability of resources in the market, specifically the developers available in the market, is not so much. So, the aforementioned areas need to be considered for improvement.

I have been using IBM API Connect for five years. My company has a partnership with IBM. Also, I am using the solution's latest version.

We are working with the big and the medium businesses.

The support is good and active. I rate the technical support a nine out of ten.

Positive

The installation is not easy. However, on a traditional VM, it is acceptable. It can get complex since it's required to have multiple components deployed, and I think it is necessary to have the technical experience to do a global configuration for production. You need some access to get the benefits of the enterprise and the platform. Also, such things are expected because the solution is an enterprise-grade player. For such a tool to have the benefits of stabilization to support the high demand of workloads, it should have a robust configuration. That is why it's not a simple configuration. I'm talking about the big enterprise, not the medium or small enterprises. It's not suitable for medium, small, and micro-enterprises because the cost of setup and the solution, along with the license, may not be suitable for small businesses.

The solution is deployed on the cloud and on-premises. Sometimes it's private, and at times it's both also. So, you have one public and a private cloud.

The deployment can take up to two to three weeks, and I am saying this considering previous projects, connectivity, and deployment, so I am talking about the time taken to build the environment.

The solution is a very, very powerful tool. It has many, many capabilities, apart from it having many, many adapters and integration with the backend to provide you with a comprehensive portal development portal application. This comprehensive portal application can be used by the developers of API since API is a fast and powerful tool. In addition, the analytic part of the tool provides you with full analytics and defines SLA for the APIs, and you can generate the analytics to get statistics about the utilization of API, which most people use. This tool is very, very comprehensive and very, very beautiful. It's very easy to use. And in addition to that, it is an API management tool deployed on an OpenShift platform to give you the capability of containerization for sustainability and agility. So, it's part of the tool.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

We utilize IBM API Connect for our B2B operations, and occasionally we extend its use to B2C as well. However, our B2B scales outweigh our B2C usage.

The IBM API Connect toolset is included in the IBM Stack ecosystem, providing cost-effective benefits for users. Additionally, users are increasingly transitioning from legacy server-based infrastructure to API-centric approaches. This shift has resulted in cost savings, as infrastructure previously built for future needs is now built as needed within an application model, reflecting a change in mindset.

IBM API Connect is a reliable and scalable solution.

The implementation process could benefit from improvements, as it may take some time to become accustomed to the deployment.

I have been using IBM API Connect for approximately five years.

IBM API Connect is a stable solution.

The solution can be stable, but it depends on the infrastructure used, such as the cloud and its structure.

The support from IBM has been good enough for our needs.

When comparing IBM API Connect to other solutions, there are two key observations to consider. Firstly, the toolset and framework around IBM API Connect are methodical, which sets it apart from close competitors like Mule and others. This approach can lead to noticeable improvements in efficiency. Secondly, if there is a need for customization to address a specific industry problem, IBM API Connect is a good option. It has built-in checks and balances to ensure that performance is not impacted, which may not be the case with other vendors.

The initial setup of IBM API Connect is complex, but once the implementor is used to it it's easier.

The solution is deployed by our in-house team.

The price of the solution is expensive. However, there are a lot of customization capabilities.

The solution does not need a lot of maintenance, it is similar to any other verification tool.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate IBM API Connect an eight out of ten.

The primary use case of IBM API Connect is for API monetization in the banking and financial sector. This involves API management and creating APIs for financial institutions, which is the main use case. Another use case is having all API integrations in one place. A third use case is opening an API and sending the documentation to external third parties.

The solution provides a common place for all APIs, allowing for easy sharing and exchange of information between internal and external stakeholders. So, the solution functions as an API management platform.

I am currently investigating the weaknesses of the solution, specifically in its on-premise infrastructure. One of the main concerns is its performance, as we have noticed some cases of resource consumption that may be related to our setup. We have concerns regarding the handling of asynchronous APIs and events in the architecture, particularly in the financial sector, where this is becoming more common. While this is well-addressed in MuleSoft, we are uncertain about how IBM API Connect handles this use case, as it does not appear to be addressed in the available documentation.

I have been using IBM API Connect for two years. My customers use the solution. I work for two companies, and none of them are partners. It is just a solution used in the banking sector.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a seven to eight out of ten.

The solution's technical support has been very responsive. I had no problems with them. I would say it's a very good and strong point of the platform.

It is an expensive solution. The licensing model is based on a per-subscription and per-subscriber end-user basis, meaning the price is determined by the end-users of the platform. Also, the price may be higher compared to some other competitors.

There are some performance issues and issues related to asynchronous APIs. So, now we are investigating these issues since they are critical ones. Owing to the aforementioned reasons, I rate the overall product an eight out of ten.

Having more integration and compatibility with different platforms is what I'm expecting in the next release of IBM API Connect.

The issues with this solution are mainly around support. Recently, people were discovering that WSO2 is commercializing it, because initially it was just open source. Right now, because they are commercializing it, the intro licenses are as costly as IBM. People say: "IBM is tried and tested", so it's people who know this who'll go the IBM API Connect route. Other people who just want to try out a more scalable solution, on the other hand, will go the open source route. Others will either just do the cloud version, because everything is less maintenance, while other people prefer doing everything themselves, e.g. in-house, from scratch.

IBM API Connect should offer more versatility to its users, because they only give you a specific level of the versatility, and this is something IBM should heavily invest on.

I've been using IBM API Connect since 2015.

I find the stability of IBM API Connect to be fine.

IBM API Connect is scalable, but scaling it is expensive, depending on what kind of hybrid or software you want to use with it. Every client has a different policy and deployment need.

The technical support for IBM API Connect is standard.

The issue with IBM that many people have realized is that there are times when the person logging those complaints actually needs to know the product. With other products or with competitors, you just need to tell them about the issues, and they'll guide you on what the problem might be. Support for IBM API Connect varies spec to spec, depending on your support level and the questions you have with whoever sold you the software.

I use different API management solutions because I'm a consultant. A customer might have IBM API Connect, while another customer might have Apigee. It also depends on what the customer has. All I do is strategy and implementation, while other people just want a consultant to deliver on specific vendors. It ranges from customer spec.

I've implemented this solution through a vendor team. I've always used consultants, partners, or integrators for implementing products.

Pricing for IBM API Connect varies. If they are offering me the platform, in particular what they used to call Bluemix and what's now called IBM Cloud, it will be subscription-based pricing. They'll charge you based on how many APIs are called off your specific portion of the Cloud.

If you're doing your own private cloud, on the other hand, it's a special grade. You have to own most of that software licensing so that you can put it on your own private cloud.

I've evaluated X-Ray, WSO2, Software AG, Oracle, DataPower, and Apigee.

I do integration and I do API management. I do a lot of other things. I don't just use one product. I use various products depending on what the client asks.

For API management, I've used X-Ray, WSO2, Software AG, Oracle, DataPower, and Apigee. It all depends on what the customer has. I also have a personal experience with IBM API Connect.

How this solution is deployed depends on you. What matters the most are the gateways and the portals. The portals are mainly for onboarding. Whether you'll deploy it on-premises or on cloud is up to you. You can also do hybrid deployment in some instances, because there are people who do hybrid deployment, but the key component for aligning a deployment is mainly the portal and the gateway, because the gateway is the policy enforcement, while the portal is mainly for presentation and onboarding purposes.

Other people are running IBM API Connect, but others are not. They just prefer using their hybrid appliances, e.g. the DataPower, so it also depends. There are cases where you can just simply deploy this solution, but it still depends on the policies that you need to enforce. That's why I was saying the key components are the portals and the gateways, because the gateways are doing most of the work. The gateway handles the transactions. It does all the heavy lifting. The portal is mainly for presentation purposes.

I've used WSO2 and Software AG, and when you compare them with IBM API Connect, the principles are more or less the same. It's more on how you want to deliver the solution and what the true need of the customer is. You get people who are using it proactively, and that puts the products on the market and drives innovation, but you also get people who are really less integrated people and just build APIs on the portal. It all depends on the use cases and what the customers are offering.

The products are all different in a way, e.g. comparable to cars. A Mercedes Benz is really not that different from a BMW. It's just more of the driving dynamics, the comfort levels, and what the brands represent. A BMW will always be sportier than a Mercedes Benz, while an Audi will always be sportier than a Mercedes Benz. This is unless you're going for the real topnotch specs: the AMGs, then it becomes a different conversation. At the end of the day, it depends on the appetite and what their initial use cases are.

The number of users of IBM API Connect all depends on the deployment plan of the customer. You get fintechs, e.g. these are mainly coalitions with banks and financial institutions where they try and drive innovation through these tech companies. By giving them access to their assets through portals and APIs, they get to see most of their IPEs realized and used by other parties. These are the people that they couldn't even reach initially. It all depends on the specs and on the range.

As for technical people, I've seen that they don't have a preference in terms of tools, but it's a matter of where the product goes that gives them an inclination to stay with those, because that stack gives that effect. It's also a matter of how they can easily integrate with other components, e.g. how they can be incorporated in your two clouds, or your other CMS, to in-house. The user experience is the same as others.

The number of users of IBM API Connect can be increased. I've seen a portal that has 4,000 to 5,000 users, and these users are people who create products, e.g. applications. A lot of those apps utilize existing portals and their APIs. What's common on my standard is more payment gateways. Every institution will offer their own payment gateway, and offer a specific sense of liability they are comfortable with.

I'm not really recommending IBM API Connect to others. It depends on the investment. For people who are heavily invested in IBM, IBM API Connect is an easy solution, because you already have the underlying infrastructure, e.g. DataPower, which is the most important or expensive component of this solution. For other people, if they don't have it at all, it makes no sense to go the IBM API Connect route if they're using a different stack. As long as the product is working, and it's compliant to specific patterns, it doesn't really matter what you use. What really matters is your budget, what do you have in your storage, and use case levels.

If people just want to have something that they can try quickly and dirt cheap, anything else will do, but then, a lot of people are also struggling with adversity, because they feel like the universities or employers are not that heavily invested, and this means they're failing the present capabilities. You just need to show them how the platform works, so it still varies from customer to customer. It's also budget based.

From a ranking of one to ten in terms of features, I can rank IBM API Connect as number six. WSO2 is a five. I'd give X-Ray a four. Software AG is a number two. Apigee ranks number one for me.

In terms of flexibility, all these platforms are the same. They are the same, but they can be different in terms of target limits.

I'm rating IBM API Connect a seven out of ten. I can't give them a ten out of ten, because I feel that they have lost their touch with it.

I use IBM API Connect to make migrations with different systems. 

We have used the cloud and on-premise deployments of the solution.

The most valuable features of IBM API Connect are its performance and user-friendliness. 

Improving the documentation would be beneficial as it currently presents navigation challenges. Incorporating a step-by-step guide could facilitate the integration or migration of various systems, including databases. The existing documentation only comprises plain text, hence incorporating more interactive instructions could enhance its usefulness.

I have used IBM API Connect within the last 12 months.

We are having some issues with the stability of the solution.

I rate the stability of IBM API Connect a seven out of ten.

We have approximately four people who use this solution in my organization.

I rate the scalability of IBM API Connect an eight out of ten.

The support from IBM API Connect is good.

I rate the support from IBM API Connect an eight out of ten.

Positive

I have no prior experience using a solution similar to IBM API Connect.

The initial installation was not simple. We had some issues with the deployment but we managed step by step. It took approximately two months to complete the implementation.

We use a team from IBM that assisted us with the implementation.

I rate IBM API Connect a seven out of ten.