IBM API Connect Reviews

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.

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 deploy APIs to expose the BFFs of mobile apps, and this is mainly in the cloud. All mobile apps consume the APIs of your BFF. On-premise, we have APIs that expose services and mainly functionalities, such as the balance of the client or the customers or the products.

One of the most valuable features is the easy-to-use web interface.

Documentation for the CLI is not very complete. Also, the support could be improved, and we have had several problems with backing up and restoring the product.

We have been using the solution for two or three years.

The stability of the solution is good.

The scalability of the solution is good.

IBM support is not available in Chile, so we must go through other countries to get a response from customer support.

I would rate the setup as a medium in difficulty. 

The solution was first set up with the help of IBM, but when we moved to another environment, we followed the initial instructions given by IBM and implemented it ourselves. 

We used Bamboo as a pipeline for automatic deployment of the API. The deployment took four hours.

The product is easy to use, but the installation is not easy. We have a team of three architects who maintain the product. I would rate this solution as an eight out of ten. 

I primarily use API Connect as a front end for any station, through which you can expose services to external or internal customers.

API Connect's best features are its data gateway, one of the strongest in the market, and its API manager, which has the local assembly transformation UI, which helps transform services from Maximal to JSON or vice versa.

API Connect's analytics subsystem could be improved to make it easier to render content from the analytics system and offload it to an external database.

I've been using API Connect for over eight years.

There are some issues with API Connect's stability, with parts going down abruptly sometimes. Its stability doesn't compare well to Epigee or Kong API, and I would only rate it seven out of ten.

API Connect is easy to scale, I would rate it nine out of ten.

IBM's technical support is terrible - they're incompetent and slow to respond, even sometimes not responding at all until they have every bit of information.

Negative

I previously used Epigee, Kong API, and 3scale.

The initial setup was a bit tricky and required a lot of installation and system administration skills. I would rate the setup two out of ten. The deployment took around two minutes and could be automated.

API Connect is expensive - I'd rate their pricing five out of ten.

I wouldn't recommend choosing API Connect unless you have a big budget and need an enterprise solution. I would give API Connect a rating of seven out of ten.

We use IBM API Connect for external communication with outside partners and external companies doing business with our company. 

This solution is deployed on-premises. We are currently using Version 5.0, but we are upgrading to version 10.0, which is a cloud-based solution. 

One of the most valuable features of this solution is that it protects our backend system. We are exposing services to external parties and using this solution to protect the backend system, and to have a navigation in between. 

The installation process could use improvement. I hope that in the next release, the installation process is easier. 

My company has used this solution for at least four years. 

There have been some internal issues within the product that have caused instability.

This solution is scalable. 

API Connect is not straightforward to install. If you don't have a lot of dependencies in your organization, it will take a short amount of time. In our case, we took at least a month because of dependencies to other departments in the company. 

For our technical team, we have approximately 10 people, a combination of managers, admins, and engineers. 

We provide this solution to customers. 

There aren't any additional costs for the consumer solution. There is no cost for the consumers to use the services because we don't monetize the services. 

We have plans to upgrade from this solution. We are upgrading to ensure that we have a supported version late next year, in November or December, and are evaluating alternative solutions in the market. 

I rate API Connect a seven out of ten. This solution is stable, but maybe not the most modern product on the market. 

Right now, our use cases are all internal. It's all API socialization internally. With version 10, we'd like to go externally with an actual API marketplace, however, we haven't gone there yet. 

I don't publish; I manage infrastructure. My role is to implement the infrastructure, maintain it, and enable the developers to leverage the technology.

The older versions of the solution were fairly straightforward to install.

The solution offers a pretty good SLA.

We deal a lot with technical support and typically they do help. We need them as we often can't find the documentation that would help us circumvent their services.

We've had some issues upgrading to the latest version of the solution.

The documentation could be improved. When we download a fix that was expected to be seamless to install, it wasn't. In the past, it was easy just to go to any product and download the documentation. If you had the license, you download the product, install it, look at the documentation. Only for specific cases would you have to reach out to support. Now it is like we know that, for these products, we're going to have to call or engage at some point with support. It's painful right now. It's not a smooth installation.

A hybrid cloud enablement would be very useful. We tried to stand up a gateway in IKS and we were told by support that that was not possible. Yet, the technical people, the designers of the solution, started saying, no, you can actually do it. However, they never said is supported, so I was never sure where the solution stands on hybrid clouds. 

The answers that sometimes are provided are not very comforting. If it isn't a full commitment it isn't going to work.

They need to make it a product that can be downloadable and installable and workable without having to engage with them directly.

I've been using the solution extensively for at least the last 12 months. We've been working with it since at least 2017. It's been a few years at this point.

Since we're mostly talking about Version 5, which is a very old version, I would have to say that it is not scalable. The memory gets too high and it affects operations. We had to request another server and it cost us money, even when we were doing a migration. Even if we wanted to go to Version 10 we have to still apply what is called a Fix Pack to the old version to have a separate infrastructure.

We have about 100 developers that use the solution currently.

We have to go through the levels of support. We open a ticket and then we try to engage. I have contacts that I can go directly to. However, if the documentation was better, we would need to interact with them less.

We are currently looking to change over to another vendor.

I actually did the initial setup for Version 5.0 which took a long time to install. It was easier, I think, as we're moving to newer versions. It is due to the fact that we've included Kubernetes and this style of installation that we're doing today which is a little bit more complex. 

The original was not nearly as complex as it is today. 

We're having some issues. If I go from Version 5.0 and I want to upgrade to 2018, I have to request new servers and then migrate all of the APIs. This is the same for Version 10 which wasn't a commitment, however, there was a communication that they would have an upgrade in place by the end of the second quarter and it didn't happen. We spent all 2018 to 2020 installing Version 2018. Now, we're told if we want to go to Version 10, we have to set up new infrastructure.

We tried to do the 2018 installation in three or four weeks and we handled it all in-house.

I cannot speak to an ROI.

We have an SLA we can draw from. I need to keep within certain numbers, however, I don't have a problem doing so. I can't speak to exact costs.

I haven't had a chance to compare the solution to other products yet, however, the plan is to move away from this product. We still need to do the research.

We are a direct customer and end-user. We aren't a partner of IBM.

We're not using the latest version of the solution right now. We have in production the original version - which I believe is Version 5.0. It was the original version. We worked all those years since 2018 and we're having some challenges to go to Version 10 which is the latest version.

Overall, I would rate the solution at a seven out of ten.

One valuable feature of IBM API Connect is its role differentiation between API publishers and consumers. Publishers can easily identify, create, and publish APIs on the developer portal, defining plans, packages, and potentially billing rules. Consumers, interested in specific API packages, can subscribe, and use the APIs, and the platform tracks usage meticulously, allowing accurate billing applications for API consumers based on their usage patterns.

The platform’s integration with the payment gateway needs enhancement. The setup process and support services could be improved.

We have been using IBM API Connect for three to five years.

It is a stable product. I rate the stability an eight out of ten.

It is a scalable product. I rate the scalability an eight out of ten.

We encounter challenges related to the availability of local support and time zones.

Neutral

We used another product for API management. However, there were several areas of improvement related to the availability of a knowledgeable and skilled support team.

The initial setup is complicated for container deployment. It is easy to maintain. I rate the process an eight out of ten.

We use the platform’s analytics feature for extracting reporting for billing purposes. It is a good feature. It offers a sandbox environment where users, such as developers or testers, can interact with and test various APIs.

In the subscription process, EVOFRO (Evaluate, Offer, Verify, Fulfill, Render, Operate) is involved, specifically during the consumer's subscription attempt. It triggers a flow that includes reviewing and approving the subscription. It helps us achieve 80% compliance with regulations for our company.

I advise customers to identify the use cases before purchasing the product. I rate it an eight out of ten.

It offers enhanced security features to protect APIs, enforce access control, and secure sensitive data. It also works as a powerful integration tool for the internal and external transmission zone, allowing us to connect with different vendors easily.

There is room for improvement regarding the connectivity of the DevOps.

I have been using it for three years. 

The solution provides high stability. I would rate it nine out of ten.

It is designed to handle large-scale API operations, so it ensures high scalability. I would rate it nine out of ten. 

They are lacking in terms of customer service and technical support. I would rate it six out of ten. 

Neutral

The initial setup is easy. It is based on available courses and steps that are comprehensive and helpful.

The deployment process is facilitated and fast. It takes about an hour for the solution to be deployed.

The pricing is significantly high. I would rate it eight out of ten.

IBM API Connect is a really good API management solution that offers a variety of benefits and advantages such as rapid development tools and enhanced productivity. I would rate it nine out of ten.