What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Apigee?

Apigee is a pretty expensive solution. On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive, I rate the solution's pricing an eight out of ten.

The solution’s pricing could be more competitive.

It is an expensive solution.

The product's pricing is fair. You need to pay additional costs for the support.

The smaller companies have a more innovative pricing model, which is why I recommend Apigee when it comes to price. We have a monthly license. I usually work on onboarding the solution for a client for about six months and then I hand it over to them.

The pricing isn't something that I deal with. I don't know the exact cost.

Compared to other products, Apigee had higher pricing.

The current version of Apigee is not too expensive, but we are currently in talks with Google to understand their roadmap for Apigee X. However, we anticipate that with the introduction of Apigee X, the pricing will likely increase.

My clients pay for a license.

Apigee has several different licenses you can obtain depending on your needs.

The solution is expensive. You can do some negotiation which might help mitigate some costs.

Apigee is easy to deploy, configure and maintain.

It was fairly expensive. I don't know what the standard pricing is. I want to say that it's something like $80,000 for 800 million requests (approximately) a year. It's basically a full-time person cost. It's not higher than the competition. Everyone is expensive. With Apigee, it's all-you-can-eat up to a point. For example, you can think of it as a dining hall where you can go in and eat anytime you want for up to 500 meals. After that, you need to buy up to get another 200 meals.

The licensing cost is quite in line with the other solutions. It depends on which perspective you see it. It could be affordable or expensive. It depends on the company. For the big companies maybe it's more affordable, for the smallest ones probably not. There are packages that you can buy or add-ons that you can add, depending on the usage, depending on what you have to do with it.

You do not necessarily pay for the license. The cloud solution is based more on transactions. So, you pay for it either way.

Its price is reasonable for the features they provide and the maturity of the platform.

Apigee is subject to licensing fees. Typically, the customer is internal, so it is accounted for in the integrated budgets.

Normally the company tends to do agreements with the vendors, where we are trying to get everything in one single license so as not to add complexity to the licensing. That's what I recommend.

If the budget is not a concern then I will choose to go with Apigee over WSA-2, but if it is then I would prefer the latter solution. Apigee is quite pricey. The price is a thorny issue as there is little room for negotiations.

The price of Apigee could be less expensive. The solution can be purchased monthly or annually.

The home version is completely free.

It is a bit on the expensive side. Its licensing cost is a bit high, and that's where we've seen people going back on their decisions.

The cost structure could be adjusted to make the pricing more reasonable. If they improved, likely they would ope themselves to many more markets.

The pricing starts off okay, however, for enterprise-level organizations, or companies that are scaling, the price can rise and become costly. If you don't scale too big, the pricing is fair.

The iicense is subscription-based.

I would like to see the implementation of further options for billing because as it is now, the opportunities you have in terms of a package are limited. You don't have the choice of too many billing models, which is an issue that needs to be worked on. My clients have a monthly pricing model.

Apigee is not cheap. It's expensive. At the same time, our company is already buying an enterprise license so any company inside the group can use it. In general, however, it's pricey.

We have a contract for three years. I don't know the cost.

The solution is not a cheap product. Licensing can be quite expensive. Our contract is around $2 million for three years. We don't have a clear picture how the billing works. We have one service package of one size and yet we don't have a clear picture of the purchase or the status or if they will charge more due to earlier limits on services. The solution needs to make licensing more clear. Even if they charged us $10,000 or even $20,000 more but they were clear about the what and the why, we'd be okay with that. We'd just like to know.

My understanding is that there are costs in addition to the standard licensing fees.

It is not suited for small companies. It's expensive. For a bank, it would not be expensive, but to implement this solution for a smaller company such as an insurance company, it would be too expensive. The pricing is complicated and not flexible. The older versions are more suited for small to medium-sized companies. You can no longer pay €20,000 per year.

The cost of the licensing is based on the number of API calls that are made. This is good because we don't pay for the number of nodes that we are installing. They also do not charge you for non-production transactions, which is extremely good. Everything else is included as a package. For example, ZooKeeper, Cassandra, and PostgreSQL are part of the product, so we don't need to purchase any additional licenses apart from the OS.