Postman vs SwaggerHub comparison

"It is a stable solution."

"We can test APIs. We know if they are functional or throwing any errors."

"The most valuable features of the solution are that it is easy to use and user-friendly."

"The most valuable feature of this solution is Collections."

"The solution is open-source and does the work required for day-to-day API testing activities."

"Postman is useful for API testing."

"The solution has a great user interface and collection of features."

"The developers put the API in a common workspace which is a nice feature. It makes things much easier and faster to start testing."

"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."

"It is a stable solution."

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

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

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

"One of the best features of SwaggerHub is how it allows me to create APIs and control the evolution of APIs within an organization."

"One of the best features of SwaggerHub is how it allows me to create APIs and control the evolution of APIs within an organization."

"The scalability is endless."

"One thing which Postman needs to improve is the documentation. The documentation of Postman is not that great when compared to other tools."

"I would like to see more integrations with other platforms."

"If they could implement auto-validations and assertions from SoapUI, that would be a very good feature."

"It should be able to check the records and compare them to the regression testing more on the automation side."

"If we have a certain build on one machine it won't work with another build even if we are using the same URL. It would give us a connection refuse. So developing environment compatibility would make it better."

"We cannot see transaction times in the product."

"The management of endpoints' headers sometimes conflicts with APIs that require information in the body, leading to difficulties."

"We do the implementation of Postman and give support. We had to use two engineers for the implementation, one senior and one junior for the process."

"The scalability aspect of SwaggerHub can be improved. It becomes a bit unreliable when the load is increased and isn't up to par with expectations for scalability."

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

"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."

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

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

"Some areas of SwaggerHub that could be improved include the interface between the code editor and the visual editor, the integration with private APIs, which currently requires an upgraded account."

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

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

"We are using the free version that is available."

"The solution's price is reasonable."

"Unlike APIs, the solution does not require a license."

"We are currently using the free version, but we have plans to buy a license."

"The solution is free for individuals, but for companies that use it across the organization, you have to pay per user."

"This tool is open-source and free to download and use."

"Postman is a free service."

"The solution has a licensing fee which might be prohibitive."

"The tool is cheap."

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