Postman Enterprise Reviews

I am working for an insurance firm, a big client in the USA. They wanted to upgrade the current technology with something new. However, they have legacy applications, and they don't want to handle APIs. They didn't want anything to hit their existing API since they have two layers of APIs. 

At the same time, there are different components with around 17 to 18 integrations and various applications.

We wanted one tool that could help us handle the restrictions and the implementation. This is both an API and a very helpful testing tool. It's user-friendly for everyone using it in a big firm.

There is a product called Guidewire that sends the data in an XML format. It's like a policy load. That information we trigger in Kafka. Kafka will take the information and send it to the REST API. With Kafka, they wanted to make two APIs to consolidate the effort. At that time, we are using the POST API tool. This tool is helping us to synchronize everything.

The version control is great. It can detect IP addresses really well.

It has a helpful API network.

The scalability is good.

It has been stable.

I haven't seen anything lacking in the solution. 

Support is not that good.

We'd like to see videos or user-friendly reference documentation to help us figure out the solution or troubleshoot issues on our own. That would be especially helpful for first-time users. 

I've worked with the solution for 18 months. 

The stability is okay. It's pretty reliable. I'd rate the stability seven out of ten overall. 

The scalability is good. I'd rate it eight out of ten. 

We have 70 top 80 people using the solution right now. 

We likely will increase usage in the future. 

Technical support hasn't been too helpful. On top of that, the documentation is lacking a bit. They're okay. They could be better.

We did not previously use a different solution. 

My understanding is that the solution is straightforward to set up. There are some challenges, sometimes, around configuration, specifically with REST API, however, it's not too difficult.

I'm not sure how many people are needed to deploy and maintain eh solution. We have a team of five or six, and we can handle it internally. 

We handled the setup in-house. We did not need outside assistance. 

I wasn't involved with the pricing. I'm not sure what the exact licensing costs are. My understanding is it is not too high. 

From a collaboration point of view, it's a useful tool. It's also super user-friendly. I'd rate it nine out of ten overall. 

The primary use case for the solution is to test the response accuracy of services that we hit without the UI.

The most valuable feature is that JavaScript can be included as tests. That makes it easier to build an end-to-end API suite and it can be automated.

Integration of the solution towards Bitbucket, BitHub, and CI pipelines is difficult.

I have been using the solution for two years.

The solution is stable.

If used as a stand-alone solution it is easily scalable.

The initial setup is straightforward. You only need to download the solution from the internet and run it. The most complex part of the setup is setting up a proxy if it is required.

I implemented the solution in-house.

Unlike APIs, the solution does not require a license.

I rate the solution seven out of ten.

As a standalone option, it's a fantastic tool, but it's very hard for us to collaborate using the solution.

Our development people use the solution for testing.

The solution is a good tool to try out new APIs that the team is building or any existing APIs. It is relatively easier to build out scripts and automate certain flows. The solution as a standalone tool is beneficial in creating utility scripts. 

We use the solution for rest API testing purposes.

The solution's most valuable feature is code-based API testing. The technicians have complete control over the business logic code in the test tool.

Occasionally, a few variables get errors due to concurrent instances running simultaneously. They should improve this particular area. Also, providing more specific documentation on configuration would be helpful.

We have been using the solution for three years.

It is a stable solution. I rate its stability as a ten.

The solution is scalable.

I visit online forums for technical support in case of any errors.

We used UFT earlier.

The solution's initial setup process is straightforward. You must know about the required environment and security credentials for implementation. It needs two test automation engineers and one business analyst to execute and takes a few hours to complete.

I rate the process as an eight.

The solution's price is reasonable. We pay around £70 a month for it. I rate its pricing as one.

I advise others to gain knowledge of JavaScript. It will help them use the solution's test automation framework with ease.

I rate the solution as a nine.

I use Postman for API testing and plan to start using it for automation testing.

Postman is useful for API testing. It also allows me to have multiple workspaces to share with my developers. I've just started using the mock servers and defining the flows, but that will take time.

The scalability of the solution can be improved.

I have been using Postman for more than seven to eight years.

The solution is stable. I rate Postman a ten out of ten for its stability.

The solution is scalable. Currently, three people are using the solution in my company. I rate Postman a six out of ten for its scalability.

I raised only two queries to the support team in the first month. I got responses for both of my queries when I was creating my mock service. So, the customer support was quick, and my issues were resolved.

The initial setup is easy and I rate Postman a ten out of ten for its initial setup. The deployment of the solution doesn't take much time. It just requires a few hours.

The solution has moderate pricing. We pay on a yearly basis for the solution’s licensing fee. I rate Postman a six out of ten for its pricing.

I have not yet updated to the 10.12 version of the solution. I use the solution very, very often, four times a week. I would recommend Postman to other users.

Overall, I rate Postman a nine out of ten. Once I cover the mock servers and automation, I should be able to give a higher rating.

I primarily use Postman to manually test our APIs with HTTP and REST calls. I don't use the more advanced features, such as script automation.

Postman lets you create, manage, and validate a suite of tests. It has several features to help you organize your test suite. You can also automate stuff with a lot of validations and assertions. Postman supports GraphQL, and you can do various kinds of calls. 

The reporting could be better. It should give you a detailed PDF report after you run a test.

I have used Postman for about four or five years.

Postman is stable. 

Postman is scalable.

Setting up Postman is straightforward and takes about an hour. 

We use the free version. They introduced a new licensing model where your company must subscribe to their services if you're using it for business purposes. However, I think they charge too much if you're only using the basic features. It limits what your organization can do if you're not a paying customer.  

I rate Postman a seven out of 10. I think seven is a decent score because it's a solid tool that installs quickly and has tons of features. Postman supports multiple formats of REST and GraphQL. You can automate your test suite and run regressions. I don't think Postman lets you connect to a lot of databases, which could be a limitation, but I recommend it. 

We primarily use the solution for testing and preparation of the base URL which I generated for the first tokenization. I prepare the test suite and the XML or Java core that give the input parameters.

The major role is the pre-requisition of the scripts in Postman - which is mandatory.

We can input parameters into Excel and execute for the application.

We work in many environments, including QA, SAP, production, pre-production, and proof. We use Postman for each and every release.  

Before anything goes to the master branch in GitHub, I'll completely check the code and unit test the complete scripting. I'll execute it one or two times, and once it's stabilized, I'll directly deploy it to the master branch.

The output has been very good.

There are lots of good features. 

Its initial setup is easy, depending on the operating system.

It is stable and reliable. 

The product is not expensive, although there is also the option for open-source, so it can be free to use.

We need better version compatibility. In open-source, the main drawback is when you go to integrate the plugins, it is entirely scripted. Sometimes the scripts aren't scripting.

The execution time should only be two or three seconds. 

We'd like to see some better UI in newer versions. 

I've been using the solution for 11 years.

The solution is stable. Before we deploy, we can check in for the local system. Once it is successful, then we'll go for the server side. That is a good practice to follow.

There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

We have 13 people using the product. It's just my team using the solution, as we have maintained the SSL certification separately.

I'm already an expert in the product and therefore do not need to contact technical support for help. If I have issues, I can troubleshoot on my own.

We chose this solution based on the project. Typically, the client requests something, and, depending on the client and the project's needs, we'll use what makes sense. We use the best tool for the job. If it happens to be this solution, then we use it. If it's something else, we use something else. 

If a file is in Windows, it is very easy to deploy the product. We can do configurations easily and handle test scripts well. It's all very straightforward.

However, other operating systems may be more difficult. The process varies depending on if you are using Windows, Unbuntu, or Linux, for example. 

Depending on the scripting, the deployment hardly takes 30 seconds to one minute. It'll check for the E2E level in the checkpoints, and how to trigger in the checkpoints.

The solution has both open-source and licensing options. You can pay for monthly licensing. However, that's not always necessary. There are also plugins that are available that we can implement. It's not an expensive product, even if you go for the license. They do have multiple licensing options as well. They have options for freelancers and mid-sized businesses as well as larger businesses. 

We are a Postman partner. 

I've been using an older version of the solution. I'm not on the latest deployment.

I'd advise others that it is important to have project middleware functionality, including for the access level. When I work with clients, I will ask for the certifications of the tool. Once the tool is initiated, 99.9% of the time,  there is no management involvement here. It's signed off on.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

Our company uses the solution for single user regression testing of APIs. For each of our releases, we run a regression report that includes APIs contained in that release. 

We create structure suites by importing API information from swagger links, writing test scripts for APIs, and validating the values in our responses. This process can take some time but completed ignition suites can be reused. 

The solution provides visibility for PDF reports without needing to install plugins. 

Other solutions like JMeter require plugins which is not ideal. 

The solution has some user interface difficulties when conducting environment collections. 

It is important to be careful when storing information to ensure files are secure and not lost. Storing information can be a bit hectic. 

I have been using the solution for one year. 

The solution is stable and provides a good user experience. 

The solution is scalable. 

The initial setup is quite easy because installation automatically sets up collections. 

Our company implemented the solution which requires manually writing the process. 

The solution has a licensing fee which might be prohibitive.

There are open source options that are cost effective and offer API testing such as JMeter. 

If JMeter is too restrictive based on your project, then I suggest moving to the solution. 

We use the solution for attrition and single user testing of APIs. 

We use JMeter for automated API testing and load testing for multiple users. 

The solution requires an awareness of APIs, JSON format, XML format, schema, and Java scripting. 

I rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

We use Postman for API testing only. We test it locally and share contracts with other teams. We also enter environmental variables to test different environments.

The environment variables are a valuable feature because I can easily switch them and see all the developments in different cycles and stages. I can deploy it locally and QA everything in different environments. 

I can copy the cURL request from the browser when browsing any website, copy the network tab from the browser and import it to Postman instead of rewriting everything, which comes in handy when debugging. If I'm working with a complete browser-deployed app, I can open a specific URL and see the recursion. 

One area that could be better is collection management. I duplicate collections and end up with lots of them. Maybe I'm not using it properly. But a better way to manage and save collections would be an improvement.

Another improvement would be the ability to clone a collection (or even have cloning as the default) to avoid time-consuming production issues.

We've been using the product for three or four years.

Postman is pretty reliable. I haven't encountered many stability problems.

Only the client can test it. I do not see much use for scalability. For example, if I have all these collections, I can use some script and automate the flow. Other than that, we don't see many use cases for Postman itself. 

So far, we've had no issues with Postman that required support because we just make an HTTP call and show the results. So we can get all the support we might need from sites like Stack Overflow.

Positive

The initial setup was straightforward with a little complexity.

Implementation was done in-house only.

We tried some different solutions after using Postman, not before. But Postman has better graphical support than its peers. At that time, I tried using a product whose name I can't remember ("Fire" something, I think) and others but had problems with them, so stopped.

I would rate this solution eight out of 10.

Regarding our relationship with the vendor, as far as I'm aware, the company has no business relationship with Postman. We use the product because it's the world's most commonly used open-source tool for repair testing.  

Regarding the number of staff required for the daily maintenance of the solution, we only make changes when the Postman tool or the contract changes. API contracts are modified daily. Most staff members continually modify or update these collections. Our developers use Postman at least once a day when developing.

My advice for others looking to implement Postman in their companies is that there is no reason to implement Postman. Plenty of other solutions are available, but most people are familiar with Postman because it appears in several YouTube tutorials. 

We mostly use a REST API for testing related to third-party applications, integrating services with third parties responsible for food delivery. Use cases include onboarding for when a new store opens, uploading the menu on the third-party app. and an API for customers to order from a menu. We also use Postman for payments, whether debit or credit card. It covers all the validation points, including whether a card is fake, stolen, invalid or blocked. We are customers of Postman and I'm a senior consultant. 

We observed that in contrast to SoapUI Pro where you're only able to save your project, Postman allows you to also save your responses so that if something isn't working you can go to your saved results and verify the responses.

The solution is simple to use and you can easily store your projects. We mainly use Postman for our manual validation, but you can also schedule the automated validation. It offers multiple scenarios for a single API that you can run whenever needed. It offers a validation kind of functionality and the execution report of scripts. How many passed and how many failed. There's no manual intervention required, you click on the run button and that's it. The dashboards are good and the solution is user-friendly. The solution gives you the capability to run your use cases without manual intervention. 

The solution is quite complex and not so easy to understand at first glance. Part of the problem is the UI which needs simplification. There are many features available but they need to structure things more so that they're not scattered on the screen which complicates things. Each time you run the solution, you have to manually provide a username and password because those details are not automatic. That's a pain point for us. It also lacks a feature that will integrate with your database. I think this is a drawback of most applications whether it's Postman or SoapUI Pro. If you want to automate something when you're using the huge APIs, everything needs to be automated using dynamic data and that takes additional time. 

I've been using this solution for six months. 

We're a large organization and I imagine there are around 1,000 people using this solution. For maintenance and upgrades, our organization has the repository to maintain all software. Though it's freeware, you cannot install it directly and we have a separate team responsible for maintaining all the software.

We use the Postman community if we have any problems. 

The initial setup is straightforward. You just have to install the application, there is no complexity in that. Deployment takes a few minutes and then you build up your URI and start using it. In total, it takes less than half an hour. 

We don't pay for any license, the solution is freeware. There are some additional features that we do need to purchase.

It's important to figure out your requirements and if you need something special, then you will have to compare the different applications and figure out which gives you better results. 

I rate the solution seven out of 10.  

I use Postman from time to time to test real-time API connections.

When I receive documentation regarding API services, I use Postman to verify that the explanation in the documentation I received is working as described. In general, the tool is good for testing purposes.

The most valuable features of the solution are drafting requests, pushing the standard, and receiving responses. The tool's basic operational stuff is valuable.

The automation testing capability is something that I haven't used. In the past, I have used SoapUI to automate tasks, but I haven't tried it in Postman. I was not even aware that it was possible to automate tasks in Postman.

Some features related to the automation of tasks need to be added to the solution. The tool may already have some automated testing features, but I haven't discovered Postman's full operational status. When I need the tool's automated testing features, I will certainly have a look at the documentation.

I have been using Postman for four years. I am a user of the tool.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

The stability of the product has been better since last month.

I have experience with SoapUI. The environment where I work for the moment is more Postman-oriented. In the past, some government departments in Belgium were using SoapUI. Postman is similar to SoapUI. The features in SoapUI, for instance, the automated testing features, are things that I don't need at the moment. Postman performs how I like it.

The product is easy to implement. You need some knowledge to implement the product. As I was more or less familiar with SoapUI, I could very easily pick up the way Postman works.

I use the tool's free version.

The product is not used for collaboration but for testing purposes in my company. In short, I use the product, and it is not used for exchanging or exporting data. I use the product at a very personal level, considering its API-related capabilities.

The tool performs well enough to meet my expectations.

I rate the tool an eight to nine out of ten.