Apiary vs SwaggerHub comparison

"Git integration"

"In two years, there was one time the service was down for an hour or so."

"Quick and easy way to share a new API design with teams."

"I find the generation of mock services very useful, especially when demonstrating for new consumers."

"I do like the overall performance of the solution."

"The most valuable features are the collaboration between multiple teams and the control and distribution of specifications."

"Code generation is one of the important features of SwaggerHub. We design our API, and we can generate a very rich codebase and add to it. The code generation feature is very valuable."

"The scalability is endless."

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

"You can click & play and add the notation in a human-readable form. Spotlight is also very good in the graphical design of APIs."

"It is a stable solution."

"It is quite a useful tool. It is quite good with the validation of the spec. It works quite well in terms of errors and conformity to the OpenAPI standard. It is better than Visual Studio Code in terms of editing."

"The tool's most valuable feature is licensing."

"Swagger (OpenAPI Specification) and Blueprint Support"

"I would like an integrated option to download a Swagger version of the definition."

"The Oracle release cycle is very bad because the patches only update once a year."

"SwaggerHub lacks in terms of integrations. They have APIs integrated, and they also have some connectors, but they don't have integration with many of the things that we use. For example, for connecting with SVN, we had to implement external scripts. So, they should work on the integration because currently, we have to work on the integration with our DevOps, continuous delivery, or continuous deployment. It would be great if these integrations are built-in. Mainly, we would like it to integrate with SVN and Jira."

"It could be more intuitive compared to one of its competitors."

"SwaggerHub's UI needs to be improved as it looks very old school."

"It has limited functionality...Unfortunately, some of its features are not what we need."

"We have to use additional tools to test APIs."

"SwaggerHub could be improved with better integration for tools."

"The review process should be improved. There seem to be some gaps, at least for us, for the editing part because we would like to have a full request review mechanism. They support some comments, but it is really hard to manage those comments. We would like to use the full request. Therefore, we are now looking to integrate with repositories. It has integration with Bitbucket and GitHub, but we have some internal constraints, and we need to move some of the repositories to GitHub. Our source code is on-premise in Bitbucket, and it was a bit of a problem for us to integrate. Now we are transitioning our repositories to GitHub, and hopefully, we can enable the integration. This will probably solve the problem with the review and approval. Its customization should also be improved. There are limitations around the support for the developer portal. There should be more customization options for the website that you can use as a developer portal. Currently, it has only Swagger UI with minimal customization. You cannot actually add additional pages and documentation for explaining concepts and general things. That's why we have started to look around to see what other tools are doing. They should also allow tagging on the API. We would like to add some tagging on the API to reflect certain things. Currently, any metadata that you would like to have has to be a part of the spec. You cannot do anything else. It should also have support for Open API 3.1, which was released at the beginning of the year. It would be great to be able to switch to that."

"More integration and usability with the cloud microservices would be nice"

"It is easy to get started with personal (free) accounts, but a subscription is required for additional features."

"There is a free subscription option to start and try the service."

"It has a yearly subscription, but I am not sure."

"The management considers it a bit expensive. At first, we wanted to purchase a license for 100 users, but we went for a license for only 15 users. Its cost is $10,220 per year."

"The tool is cheap."