Microsoft Azure API Management Reviews

We use the product for managing APIs - for internal as well as for external communication.

Furthermore we enable transparency, governance and re-use.  

- Being a PaaS component it helped reducing maintance efforts
- Homogenous solution for information exchange between internal and external stakeholders 

The most valuable feature would be the easy integration into the entire Microsoft environment, like Access Directory, the collaboration tooling, the development tooling, basically the integration into the Microsoft universe.

Multi-tenant functionalities is missing from the system, especially when it comes to purpose specific requirements such as CI, branding, language, content structure. If you're aware of the details of API Management provided by Azure, there are two areas. One is for developers, and the other is for consumers. In order to support the best, or all the different use cases we have, the multi-tenant support would be appreciated.

I've been using the product for about three years. 

The product is stable, it's good. It depends a little bit on the tier, on the different settings, and different customizations that are possible. But in general, it's a stable solution.

Technical support to a certain extent is good, it's available in the internet, if you wish. The moment you need to reach out for serious technical support in terms of incidents, or on-site support, or whatever, it becomes a little more challenging.

The initial setup for us was easy. It helps that we have Azure knowledge within the company.

Understand the different Tiers (from small to large including VNet-integrated express route)

Start small and be aware that the developer version has all features enabled which also requires the highest possible Tier.

Approach API Management in the two areas "tooling" and "governance".

Tooling required end-to-end thinking from a developer, consumer and infrastructure perspective. For each multiple examples can be shared.

For governance start with the obvious fitting to your organization. Do not follow all recommendations from the start, hence expect an iterative approach.

I would recommend this product and would rate it an eight out of 10. 

We use the solution for API management. 

The tool's most valuable feature is the integration of CI/CD with the API gateway. 

Microsoft Azure API Management needs to improve stability. 

Microsoft Azure API Management is stable; I rate it an eight out of ten. 

I rate the product's scalability a six to seven out of ten. 

The cloud-based version is not difficult to deploy. Microsoft Azure API Management's deployment depends on the API numbers customers want to onboard. It takes around four to six months. 

I rate Microsoft Azure API Management an eight out of ten. 

I mainly use Azure APIM for access management.

Azure APIM's best features are its straightforward access management (it's a single point of access for all monitoring and logging and for policy implementation) and its integration with the Azure Cloud infrastructure.

In the next release, Azure APIM should include deployment in various environments and CI/CD for deployment. They could also improve their access management portal.

I've been using Azure APIM since 2017.

Azure APIM is pretty stable.

Azure APIM is scalable.

If your services are built on the cloud, I think APIM is the best tool. I would rate APIM eight out of ten.

This solution is very flexible, and it's very compatible with the other Azure products.

The developer portal can be improved. There should be more resources available for the developers.

Better integration with third-party products would helpful.

I have been using Microsoft Azure API Management for two years.

This is a stable product and we intend to continue using it in the future.

We have more than ten users and there are five developers.

The support for Azure is excellent and we are satisfied with it.

The initial setup is very simple. It doesn't take longer than one or two hours to deploy.

A consultant assisted us with the deployment.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

The Azure Active Directory Synchronization is quite good.

They should improve the inbuilt policies that they have and that should properly create a deployment architecture as well.

We have been using Azure for about a year. 

It is stable.

It is scalable. 

The price could be lower.

At the end of the day, all the products are one and the same, just that some of them have more features than others. That's all.

I would rate Azure a seven out of ten. Not a ten because I would like for them to improve on the number of policies it has inbuilt and for it to have better deployment architecture.

Our primary use case is to provide API mapping for our clients. We're a customer of Azure and I'm a system analyst. 

The most valuable feature of the solution is it's simplicity. It's easy to set up and is very well integrated with the Azure environment.

In terms of improvement, it would be helpful if they could develop an on-premises option. 

I've been using this solution for one year. 

I would rate this product a seven out of 10. 

We are a software firm and this is one of the solutions that we provide for our customers.

The package as a whole is useful for our customers.

The API gateway, when it is deployed, is not as robust as Apigee.

I would like to see better scalability and better performance. Performance is important for us.

I have been using Azure API Management for the past two or three years.

Stability-wise it has a ways to go, although it has also come a long way since we first started using it. The issues that we have had are related to performance. Otherwise, it should be fine.

Scalability is something that is still maturing.

I have been in contact with Microsoft technical support and I would say that it's good overall.

We have also used Apigee and Azure API Management is not as robust.

I would not say that the initial setup is easy or tough, but in the middle. It can be difficult in that you need to know the components in order to use this solution to its full extent.

The length of time required for deployment depends on the use case and what we are building. It can take a month or sometimes, three months.

We do not use one particular feature over another. Rather, it is the whole package that is useful.

I would rate this solution a six out of ten.

We use the cloud model. Our primary use case is for integration between different systems. There are many use cases for the API management tool, but the most common scenario is integration between different systems.

The ease of setting up a new solution is the most valuable feature. It's very easy to set up a new solution and to deploy it to production.

The developer console for external users could be improved, especially in the testing site. I would like to see the security management for the APIs to be more granular.

It is very stable.

It's quite scalable. We've tested it in different little scenarios and it's quite scalable.

For deployment, I would advise a specialist. There is no need to dedicate any staff to the maintenance of the solution.

I would rate their technical support an eight out of ten. It could use a bit of improvement. 

I previously used RabbitMQ for another project. Both solutions have different approaches. One can work on-premises. On the whole, I still prefer is Azure API Management. I believe it's an easier solution set up and run.

The initial setup was very straightforward and simple. The deployment only took a few hours. 

I deployed the solution myself. 

I would recommend this solution to someone considering it. I would rate it a nine out of ten.