Microsoft Azure API Management Reviews

There's a customer who wanted to migrate their API from their on-prem environment to Azure. They're looking at utilizing Azure API to manage all their other APIs. We just started with migrating one of their APIs. They're still working with it, still trying to learn the difference between what they had for on-prem and Azure. We are in the process of actually migrating a lot of their APIs.

Access control is the most valuable aspect. It's the main reason really why a lot of clients are moving - as we are able to deploy multiple APIs and be able to also segregate who's got access to which API, who's got access to the other API. That centralized management is what the customer is really looking for.

The initial setup was okay.

The solution isn't missing anything. For the use case that we have right now, it's perfect. It offers everything that you'd look for in an API Management solution.

There's a new developer portal that's been added before they rolled out the new updates. I haven't really checked it out, however, the developer portal that they introduced is better than before. They've really improved on that one. If you are using the old portal, it's not as good. 

We have two different customers. The other customer wants us to move completely, to migrate their APIs to Azure. The other one wants to manage their APIs, which are running on-prem. I've explored that in the flexibility, in terms of integration with an on-prem environment. The integration could be improved for those on-prem use cases. 

The integration with other API gateways is where they might try to improve.

Support could be better. 

I started using the solution six months ago.

In terms of stability, I have seen that it is packaged into four different plans. If I'm not mistaken, there should be basic, standard, conception, and developer. I wanted to try to avoid deploying a lot of units, it uses a concept of compute units or scaling units. I was using the conception tier, which is not designed to be highly available. I was testing features, I didn't mind the level of availability. I suspect that if you choose the high-end SQL, it's most likely to be available. However, in terms of cost, I'm yet to find that out.

If you compare the SQL, and that's one that really supports scalability across regions, it's good. It's very scalable.

We have ten developers using the solution right now. 

We do plan to increase usage. 

Microsoft is huge, and when it comes to support, it's not so great as compared to, if you have something software specific. Whenever you ask them a question, they assume you to know everything. It's challenging to get the level of support that you'd want.

Neutral

We used to use Kong. 

Kong is more of an on-prem API gateway, and this one is cloud-based. And given that many customers are migrating to the cloud, it was actually one of the reasons why we're convincing the customers that we have used their APIs to migrate to the cloud. 

The initial setup was pretty straightforward. 

I have a basic understanding of the API fundamentals. Those were what I was looking for; that's what I was looking for first, just to see if my understanding of the fundamentals. With my level of knowledge, it was fine. 

For someone with basic knowledge, you can deploy the solution within a week. 

There is some maintenance needed. However, that person is supposed to be someone who's more DevOps inclined.

We handled the initial setup in-house. 

I've been using the conception tier. If you choose the lower-end tiers, it'll be fine, cost-wise. However, those tiers are just for development purposes; they're not really for the production environment. I would suspect if you move onto the higher tiers, it'll be pretty pricey.

I was looking into Azure API Management and the equivalent and in AWS.

I wanted to compare the functionality between Azure API Management and Amazon API Gateway, as there's a customer that wants AWS API Gateway instead of Azure. I just wanted to see if the features are similar. I'm looking into that now. 

We're a Microsoft partner. 

The role that I have right now is a role where I'm a deployment engineer for cloud services, so depending on what the customer wants, someone's migrating from their on-prem, from VMware, the Linux, the Hyper-V to Azure, someone has to design highly available solutions, like applications that are tiered, that is three-tiered or two-tiered. Some want to utilize API Management. With API Management, we don't have a lot of customers on that front, as they sort of don't understand how it works. Right now, it's an area where we've worked with two of our biggest customers that have got multiple APIs on their on-prem environment. I've got basic experience, especially on what an API is and the benefits of Azure API Management as compared to what they have.

We're using the latest version of the product.

We are completely moving our customers from their on-prem APIs. It's a complete cloud solution; they don't want any hybrid solution.

I'd rate the solution six out of ten based on the level of knowledge I have. The learning curve is pretty high. It's API Management and it also supports API gateways. It didn't decentralize those features, so the learning curve that's there for someone is a bit much.

I would recommend the solution to others. 

We use this product for Epics, Story and Function Management for Products and Accelerator Development, Deployment and Operations Management.

This is a One Place solution for the majority of needs in an IT and Software development environment.

Microsoft Azure API Management is better because it has a DevOps integration by default.

It would be better if it were easier to transition to Azure from JIRA. For example, there are different nomenclature that must be addressed when you shift to Azure from JIRA. JIRA's storage, tasks, and epics are treated differently from Azure. 

Here they might become functions, which is not an option in JIRA because that nomenclature difference is there. 

JIRA has sub-tasks, but sub-tasks don't exist in Azure. The nomenclature and the linking between Epics and a function and a story are different, and people may have to learn to adapt to the new nomenclature.

I have been using Microsoft Azure Project Management for about Two and a half years.

Microsoft Azure API Management is pretty stable. We are Microsoft gold partners, so we have not faced any issues until now.

Microsoft Azure API Management is scalable. The Microsoft platform supports my organization, which is 35,000 employees strong.

Technical support is pretty good. 

We were using JIRA which can be enhanced by using third-party tools, this is a costly business so we shifted to the Microsoft platform, which was integrated for development as well as management. So that's a better way of doing things.

The initial setup is straightforward. It was an organization-wide integration, so we have never faced any issues.

It's free for less than ten users. If you want to go beyond that, its paid. But when you use all features of Azure its a very cost effective solution.

Costs depend on the size, complexity, usage, and what facility you want to integrate. So, we use Microsoft Azure and have the entire DevOps and Visual Studio on the cloud. We get all enterprise flavor with very optimum cost, when compared to multivendor environment.

I would tell potential users to go for it. It's a good platform. Even though the ecosystem may not be that strong, it's a better option for a software development company. You can explore other options to save some bucks if you are not into software development. However, for an IT company, Microsoft Azure is the better option.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Microsoft Azure API Management an eight.

One of our applications went live a month ago, and it uses the whole suite of Microsoft APIs.

I like the support they provide for the APIs more than the solution itself. First of all, documentation-wise, both Microsoft Azure and even Google Cloud are up there. But in comparison, the real-time consulting and support for APIs make Microsoft stand out a little.

I also like the performance. Standard public cloud provider-built APIs are more resilient and flexible in terms of what feature you want to use and what feature you don't want to use, and they're more customizable. They are more resilient in terms of performance in that particular environment because that is the design aspect of the offering.

When public clouds build APIs and deploy them after testing them on their framework for a certain amount of time, I feel there is a massive difference in the product's performance. On the interface, everything is strong.

Specific to API development, I think Microsoft is still far behind AWS. AWS has grown by leaps and bounds, and Microsoft is a close second. But in terms of features and other stuff they provide, Microsoft's compatibility with publicly available APIs is a little limited. So, that is a little bit of a constraint. But what they provide is good, it's just that they need to build more on their API suite. I think Google is doing a really good job at that.

We have been using Microsoft Azure API Management for at least a year.

Microsoft Azure API Management is stable.

Microsoft Azure API Management's scalability is pretty good. At present, we have around 10,000 to 15,000 users. We are also evaluating the application, and we should grow in the cloud rapidly from now on.

Microsoft's support stands out. They provide good support in terms of consulting and operation support for their API. So, that is very helpful. Microsoft sometimes looks at the size of the customer, the way they are involved, and the size of the environment. They are also willing to go beyond periodically to consult on the best way to do stuff.

On a scale from one to five, I would give Microsoft technical support a four.

Positive

The initial setup wasn't entirely straightforward or altogether complex. It was somewhere in the middle.

On a scale from one to five, I would give the initial setup of Microsoft Azure API Management a three. For me, AWS is two, and Microsoft is three.

We did the deployment in-house, working directly with Microsoft.

Because of our partner relationship, our pricing is pretty decent. But in general, if I compare pricing, I think the initial offer that we got from Microsoft until the relationship kicked in was more expensive than AWS.

There were some unexpected expenses because we had to pause. This was due to our inexperience and because we were doing this significant public cloud migration for the first time. We were using SAP on a public cloud for the first time. 

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Microsoft Azure API Management an eight. 

We use the platform to configure API connectors with authentication and generate reports. We utilize it within a private cloud environment as part of our system integration services, providing these services to other users.

The solution has significantly improved our organization by providing a user-friendly and easy-to-deploy API management system.

The platform's most valuable features are its rule-based permissions and comprehensive API lifecycle management capabilities.

The solution's deployment process could be slightly improved in terms of time. Additionally, they should enhance AI capabilities and more advanced integration features with other platforms.

I have been using Microsoft Azure API Management for six years.

The product is stable. We haven't encountered any stability-related issues. 

The product is scalable. 

We have used different solutions in the past.

The initial setup was straightforward and user-friendly.

We implemented the product with the help of our in-house team. 

We have seen significant financial benefits after using the product. Moving to the cloud offers many advantages.

The product pricing is reasonable. 

We evaluated other options, including solutions from AWS and Google Cloud. However, Microsoft Azure API Management stood out for its feature set and easy integration with our existing infrastructure.

We use the platform for all acquisitions and system management, automating various processes. Our API server is integrated into our cloud system ensuring everything is documented in a single query.

I rate it a ten out of ten. 

Since we built our product around APM, our clients use it directly. They find APM to be a simple and straightforward solution that fulfills all their API management needs.

Our clients use APM because it's a SaaS-based solution that comes with Azure Stack-managed services, making it easy for us to use and fulfill all their use cases.

We are actually partners. We built our product on top of APM and provide it to our customers.

API gateway-related features were fulfilled by APIM. So those features, we are completely leveraging for our solution, like throttling. It is fair and easy. It's a low-code, no-code model of API hosting.

There is room for improvement in the user interface and workflow for hosting APIs, especially third-party APIs. 

Another area of improvement is the pricing model. The solution has an add-on cost, and if we want to leverage some of the features, we are forced to buy it. So, cost-wise, it's not ideal.

I have been working with this solution for one and a half years. There isn't really a specific version since it's a managed service in the cloud. However, with Apigee, there are different versions available, as it can be hosted on-premises. But for APM, it's only available in Azure as a managed service.

I would rate stability a nine out of ten. 

I would rate the scalability a nine out of ten. It can host it in different regions, and we can point to the same set of backups and try to expose the APIs. Our current customers are in the medium category that's why I rated scalability a nine. 

We have a strategic partner for technical support, and they are very responsive.

Positive

I would rate the initial setup an eight out of ten, where one is difficult and ten is easy. Previously, we were using Apigee, so comparing it to that, it's cloud-specific and opens the gateway. So there were some challenges.

The deployment was quick. The deployment of this product was managed by a manager, so once you set it up, it has a quick turnaround time. 

We used the Azure deployment model and followed the recommended steps for posting the APIs, and also followed the Azure recommended layer for deployment.

Compared to Apigee, which is a one-time cost for on-prem, this solution is cloud-specific and a managed service. So cost-wise, it's comparatively expensive. I would rate it eight out of ten, where one is low and ten is high. 

Moreover, there are additional costs to the standard licensing fees. We have to purchase four to five managed services around API to use it. For example, we use the express route and key vault, and we have to purchase those features along with API.

We explored different options and found that APM was the most suitable for our scenarios.

Overall, I would rate it eight out of ten. The reason is, as I mentioned earlier, it is best suited for our use case. One reason is that the product is only available in Azure. So, we are leveraging multiple managed services and building the product around that. Additionally, we select it according to the customer's needs. The hosting API workflow needs to be improved.

Our company uses the solution for API orchestration and UI management. We currently have 50,000 users. 

The UI management is very easy to use. 

The solution provides good management of API orchestrations. 

Technical support is very good and moves very fast. 

The API gateway can be very complex. We had difficulty managing end users for a very, very complex project. 

I am not sure that another API gateway would have better handled this difficult project. 

I have been using the solution for four years. 

The solution is stable. 

The solution is scalable. 

We have a partnership with Microsoft. Their support is very good and moves very fast. They are available to us in a maximum of ten to twenty minutes. 

The setup is very easy and doesn't take long. 

We implemented the solution in-house. 

I also use WSO2 and Kong. Of all the options, Kong is my preference because it is easier to use. 

The solution's support is very good. 

I rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

The tool provides the data in an API, and our company fetches that data to our clients' websites. We also provide API data to the clients we handle.

The solution's most valuable feature is that it is very simple to manage, especially because I have good experience with Microsoft products. The tool is very easy to use and manage APIs.

I don't think anything needs improvement because the tool is up to date.

Sometimes, we face some issues with the tool, but they are manageable. Previously, our company's cloud services were shut down, and we used to take more time to update services, so such issues are areas where improvements are needed.

In the future, I want to see the tool offer API integrations. It can help us manage things in a more effective manner. For example, if we are integrating with any platform, it should provide ways on how we can integrate because each platform comes with different compatibility points. Changes in the tool can be helpful to deal with compatibility issues and resolve them.

The only problem with the tool is that the cloud services were shut out. That's the challenge you had. AI features could be added to the tool to make it more easy to manage.

I have been using Microsoft Azure API Management for two and a half years. My company is a managed service provider for our US clients.

It is a 99.99 percent stable solution.

It is a very easily scalable solution. There are no limitations to adding any number of devices.

The solution's technical support is satisfactory. I rate the technical support a nine out of ten.

Positive

I am only working with Microsoft Azure API Management. I don't have experience with another vendor. From the beginning of my job, I have been working with Microsoft Azure.

I think AWS and Azure are providing similar services, but Azure is a little bit easier.

The product's installation phase is simple and not too complex.

Actually, we work in a team, so we divide all the work in the team. We have a three-person team for the tool's deployment.

The solution can be deployed in a day.

The tool can help save time by around 15 to 20 percent. If I am working in AWS and with Azure, I see that Azure is much easier and helps save time while also being able to manage and deploy the API services.

I would describe the tool's price as being in the mid-range category.

The security part is handled by another person in my company. I am handling the APIs only. I also deal with the analytics part of the tool.

The product's maintenance phase is easy.

I think it is a bit easy to integrate the tool with other systems. One person who works with AWS feels that it is a bit complex to integrate it with other systems, while Azure's integration features are a bit easier to manage. In terms of integration, Azure is easier than AWS.

Currently, I don't see any API integrations.

I rate the tool an eight out of ten.

It is easy to use. 

They need to work on the third party integrations. 

I have experience with Microsoft Azure API Management. 

The technical support team is good. 

Positive

The initial setup is straightforward. 

Microsoft is competitively priced. 

Overall, I would rate the solution a seven out of ten.