Postman Enterprise Reviews

We used the solution in multiple ways, including:

1. We create Rest APIs for the communication of the front end to the backend. For the testing of those Rest APIs, we use Postman. It provides a user-friendly platform for API testing with all the request methods like GET, POST, PUT, DELETE, PATCH, and many more. We can create our own collections like group requests. We can easily share the collection with the team.

2. We are using Postman to create the documentation of the REST APIs, which the backend team creates, so the frontend engineer can easily see the request type, headers, methods, and response body for the request. 

3. It is also used as an API testing tool by the automation testing team. We can write our own tests with the assert statements in Postman after the response. 

Postman helps us to automate the API testing in the team.

It helps to share the Rest API documents with the front-end team so that they can easily integrate the API with the front-end.

It also helps in the monitoring of the APIs to check the health of an existing API.

It makes API development and testing faster and more user-friendly. It does not require any prior knowledge to work with the Postman. 

It supports the GQL requests as well as the REST API.

It allows all the request methods like GET, POST, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, COPY, OPTIONS, LINK, UNLINK, and many more. 

It allows all types of authentication requests like API Key, JWT bearer, Basic OAuth, OAuth 2.0, Bearer token, and many more. 

It allows us to set the environment variables as per our different environments, like QA1, QA2, STAGE, DEV, PERF, and UAT.

It allows you to write the pre-request script that runs prior to any API call. 

It allows us to save requests in a collection and share the collection with the team.

There is no support for the SOCKET testing with Postman.

There is no support for the testing of the SOAP APIs.  

Sometimes it crashes when a lot of collections are imported in a Postman.

There is no mechanism for parallel testing. 

There is no scope for load testing like in JMeter. 

There is low script reusability. 

It does not support SMTP protocols; it only allows HTTP protocol.

It does not allow for a data-driven approach. It cannot get the data from a database and use it for testing purposes.

I have been using Postman for the last three years.

It is easy to use and is a lightweight solution. For the last three years it has been working perfectly fine, and we are using it for API development, API testing, and documentation to share with the front end.

We can easily use Postman for large projects. We can create collections - as many as we want - and share them as JSON, for example.

There is a huge community of Postman users. I have never had a chance to connect directly with the support team of Postman as I get help online. 

We have been using Postman from the start as it is user-friendly and does not require any prerequisite language to use it.

It's quite easy to set up. You simply download it and then install it and start using it. 

We are using the free version as of now. However, the paid version allows users to create the workspace and share the common collection with more than four teammates.

We evaluated Katalon as well.

It is easy to use. However, it does not allow for Socket and SOAP API testing.

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. 

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. 

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.

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.

I use Postman in my company for API testing.

Postman has a lot of additional features like the ones offered by SwaggerHub. Postman is a bit more complicated compared to SwaggerHub since you have to insert bearer tokens all the time and set everything from the start. I mainly use SwaggerHub as it is easy for me. I always get back to SwaggerHub from Postman.

Postman is a bit more of a complex tool, making it an area where improvements can be made.

Postman is good the way it is right now, so there's nothing to change in it.

I have been using Postman for a year. My company is a customer of the product.

It is a stable solution.

In my company, over 50 employees use Postman.

Given an opportunity, I would prefer to use Postman over SwaggerHub. People mostly prefer to use SwaggerHub over Postman.

The product's initial setup phase was easy and not difficult.

The solution is deployed on an on-premises model.

I would recommend others to use Postman. I am a QA, and I should know about different products before I use Postman. In short, a person should know to use it.

I rate the overall tool a nine out of ten.

We use this solution for every API development.

We are exploring code generation and how it works. We also like the test functionalities and snippets that we can use directly.  

Moreover, the tool is simple and easy.

Integration should be improved with our continuation system because we use Azure DevOps separately.

I have been using Postman for around two years. Initially, we used it only once, and now we use it more.

The solution is stable.

The solution is easy to scale till now.

We are using the solution for five people.

We get help from videos and the web.

Positive

We have also worked with SoapUI, but we like Postman because it has automation.

Postman is a more compact tool, and it has many functionalities. In the first stage that we used, Postman, we only tested how it works. Now we are using more functionalities. With SoapUI, it's because some customers have used it to define the APIs, and then we have to interact with this environment.

But we use Postman, and we prefer Postman. Although, there are some tools from SoapUI that are good. For example, the API design, checking, and definition. If Postman has anything similar, you can check the definition of the API, and it proposes you an improvement and so on, but in the development phase, we used Postman, and we like Postman.

The solution’s initial setup is easy. The maintenance is easy as well because we are not doing all the possible accents and because we are not doing anything to maintain.

The solution is deployed on the public cloud and on-premises in our organization. But I use it more in the cloud.

The solution’s pricing is realistic according to our usage level. As we grow and require additional functionality beyond what we currently use, there is a higher cost while upgrading the developer plan. We want to explore features like automatic code generation and other functionalities.

We are paying only for the license for now, and it comes with a monthly subscription.

Postman is one of the most widely used tools in the market. When you use it, it is practical and useful. You need to check whether it suits your team, project type, and work to take profit from the way Postman works. From the beginning, it is one of the three main tools you must explore if you regularly deal with APIs.

However, I am still exploring all the tools, and I don't know if I can maintain it or not. When I know all the different technologies better, I will be able to say.
Overall, I would rate the solution an eight or nine out of ten.