Microsoft Azure API Management Reviews

The tool helps to manage APIs. 

The tool does what it's supposed to do. 

The product needs to introduce a developer portal. 

I am working with the tool for ten years. 

The solution is stable. 

My company has around 20-30 customers for the solution. Each customer can have about 100 users for the tool. 

Microsoft support is good. We have regular sessions with Microsoft where we can have private previews of new features. 

The tool's setup depends. If you use it in the CI/CD pipeline, then the setup is complex. To deploy the solution, you need to create a template and enable the features. 

There are different tiers for pricing. You can even use the free version. 

I would rate the product an eight out of ten. 

My primary use case is application monitoring.

We had all our Saas applications on the cloud, so it's easier to centralize everything in Azure, including configuration and maintenance. There's also no need to get another portal for maintenance on additional things, so we can monitor the issue directly.

The most valuable features are the Active Directory integration and wireless backup.

Azure API Management could be improved with better integration with all of Microsoft's tools. They should also provide basic cybersecurity tools in the package.

I've been using this solution for two years.

Azure API Manager is stable.

This solution is scalable.

Microsoft's technical support is helpful, although there are some issues with time zones.

Positive

The initial setup was easy - it didn't take long, and the additional features were added normally.

We implemented using an integrator.

There are no additional costs above the main license.

We're very satisfied with Azure API Management. We've had no issues with bugs, everything runs smoothly, and the connection between the cloud and the on-premise infrastructure was good. I would rate this solution nine out of ten.

The main uses of this solution are sharing data, internal integrations, and combining different backend services into one API proxy. In the latter case, we extract the whole complexity of the integration, and after the work is done, there's a proxy available that can be used and reused by API consumers.

The most valuable features are authentication and authorization. I would also argue that the mediation and translation from SOAP to REST technology is equally important because it makes it possible to open up legacy systems that couldn't be opened before.

An improvement would be to provide more information about additional prices and the onboarding process.

I've been using this solution since 2016.

Azure is very much stable.

This solution is very scalable.

You really need an expert to onboard the solution because it comes with more complexity than you might think. Also, internal teams often start playing with the solution during onboarding instead of sticking to best practices, which can result in having to start the process over again.

The ROI on API management as a concept metric that we are using in conversations is that we can reduce integration lead times by 90%. So, where an integration would take a hundred days before, we can deliver that same integration in ten days after implementing Azure.

Azure's pricing is very competitive compared to platforms like Apigee and MuleSoft. However, when you start with Azure API management, you also need to onboard the Azure console and the Azure cloud environment, which comes with a price.

Azure is the best-priced quality solution in the market. If you have business-critical processes running over API management, I would advise installing managed services either internally or from a partner to have that very close follow-up. I rate this solution eight out of ten.

My primary use case is as part of a multi-channel strategy wherein APIMs are being used with micro-products or third-party clients. Our web application firewall receives all the external and public traffic, and it re-routes to the APIM, which is on the private subnet. The APIM manages both in authentication and authorization service composition layer.

One thing that could be improved is to remove the dependency of Kubernetes as an external L4 load layer balance. It would also be useful if APIM could integrate internally with Kubernetes right out of the box.

I have been using this solution for around two years.

General support has been very good, but sometimes when immediate support is required, it isn't available.

The initial setup was quite easy as it is a managed service.

I used a managed service to implement.

I would rate this product as seven out of ten.

I am using Microsoft Azure API Management to connect external systems.

The solution has overall high performance.

Microsoft Azure API Management could improve by having better integration with third-party solutions.

In an upcoming release, there should be more focus on API lifecycle management, such as MuleSoft provides and the API gateway is not comprehensive enough, we need to put a lot of extra effort doing manual work. 

I have been using Microsoft Azure API Management for half a year.

The solution is stable.

For what we have been using the solution for it has been scalable.

Our company is a medium-size using this solution.

We have found some configuration that is not supported by the solution yet. There is room for improvement in their support.

I would rate the technical support of Microsoft Azure API Management a four out of five.

The setup and configuration are very quick.

The price of the solution is reasonable compared to others. 

We are still looking for a better API-optimized solution.

I would recommend this solution for some small and medium-sized projects, as it is quite easy and effective to start with. I am not sure if it is suited for large companies that have heavily loaded APIs which the solution might not be able to support.

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

We use Microsoft Azure API Management with a custom software solution.

I like the stability and the ease of use.

The licensing fees should be cheaper.

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

Microsoft Azure API Management is a stable product.

It is a scalable solution. We have 60 users in our organization who use this solution.

Technical support is good.

I knew MuleSoft Anypoint. I worked with it for two years.

It was better for the enterprise architecture to use Microsoft Azure API Management.

Microsoft Azure API Management is easy to install.

We have a team of four engineers and managers to maintain this solution.

The licensing fees are expensive. I would like it to be cheaper.

Our licensing fees are paid on a monthly basis.

I would recommend this solution to others who are interested in using it.

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

We use this solution because when there is a technical requirement sometimes there are technical constraints that need to be overcome, and that is best resolved through the API component. My organization predominately uses Microsoft solutions and this is why we are using this particular solution.

I have found this solution to be easy to configure, simple to use, and flexible.

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.

In an upcoming release, if not already added through an update, I think dynamic provisioning of the resource would be useful. Many times these API platforms, including others, such as Apigee, are still predominantly revolving around developers. The onboarding and the API life cycle are still revolving around humans. In this context, I would not suggest DevOps, but at least automation of common pipelines. If the platform can better support this in the workflow to provision and commission an API that would be beneficial as we work towards a more automated deployment concept. Even though there are templates, graphics, and API management commands right now, you are still in a way programmed deeply, customizing that workflow, as opposed to it being part of the platform itself.

I have been using Azure solutions for approximately four years.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable because it is a cloud service offering.

I have previously used Apigee and Mulesoft.

Since this is a cloud-based solution you have to abide by those financial limits, this creates some different challenges compared to other solutions.

My advice to those wanting to implement this solution is in all technology areas, each solution is use case-specific. If you are already working on the pure Azure Stack, then APIM is something that I would suggest. Unless you have a very complicated API development use case I would not try to deploy, for example, Mulesoft or Apigee on Azure. Assuming you are working on a full Azure Stack solution. 

Since it is use case-specific, rather than trying to build out. I would rather use the other repertoire of Azure to do the API development, as opposed to trying to deploy other solutions under the platform and develop from there.

My philosophy is always, use what is available, rather than trying to reinvent the wheel. Mulesoft may be powerful, but it is putting the cart on top of the wheel and try to build something on the cart. It is not a native approach.

I rate Microsoft Azure API Management a seven out of ten.

We have two approaches to how we use the solution. We own the managed services and the other we have customers take the subscription and we manage it. 

From my understanding, there are some constraints around governance and service-to-service intercommunication managing priorities and our own governance. Examples include, how you manage all your clusters, the entire service communication, and having more tolerant experts.

I have been using the solution for approximately one year.

The technical support has not been the greatest. Microsoft has been outsourcing its support services and we have quite a few challenges in terms of technical support. We rarely asked them for anything and try to find the solution ourselves. This has been our most recent experience. However, there are certain advantages as well. Now you have a large internet resource pool to support Azure. This balances the support out, but otherwise, if you are looking for very specific support, there will be some challenges for your teams.

The initial setup is not that complex, but there are certain challenges.

We are limited to what choice of solution we can purchase. There are multiple aspects here. If it is a choice that we have to make, then we do it based on the requirement or recommendations, such as GCP, AWS, or Azure platform. However, given the present circumstances, the customer base that I am supporting at the moment is all Microsoft shop customers. Their inclination is always towards Microsoft-based solutions. That is where it has left us with no choice, but to go with Azure. While we still recommend this solution in some cases, for instance, analytics and where we need the big data solutions. We have been pushing for a GCP and in some cases to have AWS as well. For now Azure is the platform and this has been the journey that has left us with no choice but to go with it. Based on the resources that we are leveraging, the price we are paying to use this solution is slightly higher than other competitors. In a few cases, it has its own advantage in some resources. 

I have evaluated GCP and AWS.

I would advise those wanting to implement this solution that they can use this solution if it fits their deployment criteria. However, there are better options available.

I rate Microsoft Azure API Management a seven out of ten.