Postman vs SwaggerHub comparison

"It's user-friendly. Anybody can learn it within five to seven minutes."

"Postman is useful for API testing."

"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 helps me to test APIs independently. It also supports hosting."

"The most valuable feature of Postman is the verification and testing of APIs."

"The initial setup is simple."

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

"This solution offers a free version."

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

"I rate the solution's stability a ten out of ten."

"It is a stable solution."

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

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

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

"The scalability is endless."

"Multi-part requests should be handled in the octet-stream."

"I live in Turkey, so for me, the value of dollar currency is high...Postman can change its pricing policy and decrease the prices for Turkey."

"We cannot see transaction times in the product."

"There needs to be more flexibility surrounding the testing of SOAP APIs."

"Testing API is pretty straightforward in Postman, but it falls short when testing web services. For example, when we test web services, there is a visual component that we can import in SoapUI but not in Postman."

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

"Could be more user friendly."

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

"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."

"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."

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

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

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

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

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

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

"We do not pay any money for Postman."

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

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

"We are using its free version."

"This is an open source solution."

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

"This solution offers a free version."

"I rate the price of Postman a four out of five."

"The tool is cheap."

"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."