Postman Reviews

We have been using Postman primarily for API automation.

API automation is crucial because every change in an API could have a significant impact. Postman has greatly reduced the effort required in testing APIs, thus enhancing our efficiency.

Postman is easy to use and enables us to test all possible API testing scenarios. It is economical compared to other testing tools, which is a valuable feature for us.

The main improvement needed is better integration with test management and other tools to allow a common dashboard for all testing metrics and details.

We have been using Postman for four to five years.

Postman is stable enough for our needs, although we have not tested it extensively with a large number of test cases.

We did not test Postman with thousands of test cases, so we cannot comment on its scalability for larger repositories.

We have not contacted Postman's technical support as we have managed all our needs internally.

Positive

Prior to using Postman, we used SoapUI. SoapUI was very basic and lacked many features that were then added in the paid version, SoapUI Pro, which was expensive. Postman provides better features than SoapUI.

Installation of Postman is straightforward and can be completed in a few hours by one person.

We did not require any external team for the implementation and managed it internally.

The return on investment is significant due to Postman's efficiency in automating API testing, which involves many input and output parameters.

Postman is economical and is considered to be rather cheap compared to other software solutions.

I have evaluated other tools such as Katalon, Tricentis Tosca, and Universal Function Test (UFT) from OpenText.

I would recommend enhancing Postman's integration capabilities with test management tools to better consolidate testing metrics.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

I'm using Postman for manual testing of REST APIs. There are some built-in collections done by some of my teammates, so I use those.

The solution is deployed on a public cloud.

I have used some parameterization from a global variable, so that was working fine for me. It's easy to see different versions of responses. There's also a possibility for automation.

We cannot do database connections from Postman directly, and we don't have a way to do that. If they could implement auto-validations and assertions from SoapUI, that would be a very good feature.

We don't have a provision to go and connect to the database from Postman. That's one drawback. If you want to automate in Postman, there is a major drawback. Being a tester, you always want to cross-verify your data with the database. If the database is not connected, then part of your testing becomes manual.

I have used this solution for about seven years.

It's stable. Sometimes it has gone off, and I have had to rebuild the collections again. I've had to switch the logins sometimes. It has crashed twice, and I lost my suites and had to build it again.

Initial setup is easy. Sometimes we get the proxy errors, but when we go to the settings and disable the proxy things, it's pretty simple. Comparatively, SoapUI is easier for me.

Maybe some people who don't have a licensed version of Postman or ReadyAPI might feel that it's easier to automate with Postman, but I'm not sure about that because I haven't done it.

I would rate this solution as four out of ten.

If you don't have SoapUI or if you don't know about SoapUI, then of course you can use it. If you want to explore Postman, it's a free tool.

I use Postman in my company for API testing.

Postman has a lot of additional features like the ones offered by SwaggerHub. Postman is a bit more complicated compared to SwaggerHub since you have to insert bearer tokens all the time and set everything from the start. I mainly use SwaggerHub as it is easy for me. I always get back to SwaggerHub from Postman.

Postman is a bit more of a complex tool, making it an area where improvements can be made.

Postman is good the way it is right now, so there's nothing to change in it.

I have been using Postman for a year. My company is a customer of the product.

It is a stable solution.

In my company, over 50 employees use Postman.

Given an opportunity, I would prefer to use Postman over SwaggerHub. People mostly prefer to use SwaggerHub over Postman.

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

The solution is deployed on an on-premises model.

I would recommend others to use Postman. I am a QA, and I should know about different products before I use Postman. In short, a person should know to use it.

I rate the overall tool a nine out of ten.

Postman is a scripting tool.

I started using the solution when we did an SDN-based network implementation from Cisco. I got introduced to a particular scripting tool where I could actually put down everything in an Excel sheet. And if I want to configure, for example, ten ports, then I can actually do the configuration of everything in an Excel sheet. I can pass my credentials in Postman, and I can import the SQL script, and based on whether it's an infrastructure script or a configuration script, I can actually save it in Postman.

I'm using Postman to only push the scripts into the ACI, and that is a very limited use of Postman that we do right now.

I'm sure it might have other usages. That said, we have not explored other features beyond that at this point in time.

The initial setup is easy.

The solution is stable.

It is very user-friendly and has a nice UI.

My limited use of Postman has been to get the output of scripting in Postman or get the output from APIs and then open it in Postman or post the script. We don't use it much beyond that and therefore haven't really explored the features. It's hard to say what is lacking.

Postman does not have a check-in balance. Essentially what I mean by that is if there is something that is already configured on a particular device, it just overrides it without checking whether you really want to override it or not. Even if it is by mistake, if there is a dialogue box that is available before it overrides, it's just a much nicer feature to be notified if you're doing something by mistake.

I've been using the solution for a while. 

The solution is stable and reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. We haven't faced any issues.

I know that our team, which is three people, uses the solution. I'm not sure who else does in the company. We're all engineers. 

We have received all of the support we required. Postman has a very good team.

We use quite a few products from an infrastructure point of view. We use SolarWinds, both for server and infrastructure capacity, and we use a change management and a problem management tool. From a bandwidth monitoring perspective, we use a network analyzer; we use Splunk heavily. We do a lot of scripting tools using Postman and Python.

I'm more into Python since Python gives us many more API interjections and compatibility with a lot of other APIs. We started using Postman, and then we immediately moved to Python-based scripting.

The functionality that Python gives you concerning the available APIs and then the ability to put that in the Excel sheet is much better than Postman.

The solution is very easy to set up. There were no issues. 

I don't deal with the licensing aspect of the product. 

We looked into other solutions. However, Cisco actually recommended Postman, so we went with this product. 

I'm an end-user.

I'm not sure which version of the solution I'm using. 

New users need to watch a few videos and understand the solution pretty well. If you are using Postman for the first time, never use the administrative credentials. It is very easy for you if you're using the administrative credentials to pass through the Postman's scripts. It is possible that you might override the configuration unknowingly. If that happens, that can actually bring down a good amount of your configuration or an earlier configuration. It's best to actually get the solution into a development environment before you actually do anything on production.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. It's a good, very user-friendly scripting tool. Anybody can learn it and start using it. However, new users do need a little bit of knowledge and must be willing to learn as they go.

We use Postman for API testing, and I am also using it for training purposes.

I have found that our time is significantly saved in terms of debugging and writing down the code manually as Postman allows us to add the code with the help of test and assertions, eliminating the need to write code ourselves.

The user interface is very easy to learn and use, and it is a lightweight application. It's also an open-source tool for API testing. One of the best features is that you really don't need to be an expert in any programming language because Postman can generate the codes automatically for you.

Postman needs to improve its support for a lot of integrations. Additionally, browser add-ins or extensions would be helpful.

I have been using Postman for quite a while, perhaps for the past seven or eight years.

The initial setup is very easy and simple.

Being an open-source tool, it's a lightweight tool that I would prioritize as number one.

I would prefer Postman as my priority since it's an open-source tool, simple to install and use. You don't need to be a programming expert to use it, which presents several advantages.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

We use this solution for every API development.

We are exploring code generation and how it works. We also like the test functionalities and snippets that we can use directly.  

Moreover, the tool is simple and easy.

Integration should be improved with our continuation system because we use Azure DevOps separately.

I have been using Postman for around two years. Initially, we used it only once, and now we use it more.

The solution is stable.

The solution is easy to scale till now.

We are using the solution for five people.

We get help from videos and the web.

Positive

We have also worked with SoapUI, but we like Postman because it has automation.

Postman is a more compact tool, and it has many functionalities. In the first stage that we used, Postman, we only tested how it works. Now we are using more functionalities. With SoapUI, it's because some customers have used it to define the APIs, and then we have to interact with this environment.

But we use Postman, and we prefer Postman. Although, there are some tools from SoapUI that are good. For example, the API design, checking, and definition. If Postman has anything similar, you can check the definition of the API, and it proposes you an improvement and so on, but in the development phase, we used Postman, and we like Postman.

The solution’s initial setup is easy. The maintenance is easy as well because we are not doing all the possible accents and because we are not doing anything to maintain.

The solution is deployed on the public cloud and on-premises in our organization. But I use it more in the cloud.

The solution’s pricing is realistic according to our usage level. As we grow and require additional functionality beyond what we currently use, there is a higher cost while upgrading the developer plan. We want to explore features like automatic code generation and other functionalities.

We are paying only for the license for now, and it comes with a monthly subscription.

Postman is one of the most widely used tools in the market. When you use it, it is practical and useful. You need to check whether it suits your team, project type, and work to take profit from the way Postman works. From the beginning, it is one of the three main tools you must explore if you regularly deal with APIs.

However, I am still exploring all the tools, and I don't know if I can maintain it or not. When I know all the different technologies better, I will be able to say.
Overall, I would rate the solution an eight or nine out of ten.

The primary use case of this solution is for the API manual testing, manual verification to get the response, and for API automation.

The most valuable feature is the user interface because it provides a clear space for the URL, headers, body, prerequisites, and tests.

The solution can be improved by providing detailed error logs including the line the error took place to make it easier to correct. I would like to see functionality added for uploading specific scripts and not the entire collection.

I have been using the solution for three years.

The web app version is more stable than the desktop application.

The solution is scalable.

The support team is very responsive in resolving any issues we have.

Positive

The initial setup is straightforward. 

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

I give the solution ten out of ten.

If you have a small amount of knowledge of HTTP status codes, how to make collections, and how to deal with environment variables is enough to use this solution.

We have 1000 people in our organization using the solution daily.

Our company uses the solution for single user regression testing of APIs. For each of our releases, we run a regression report that includes APIs contained in that release. 

We create structure suites by importing API information from swagger links, writing test scripts for APIs, and validating the values in our responses. This process can take some time but completed ignition suites can be reused. 

The solution provides visibility for PDF reports without needing to install plugins. 

Other solutions like JMeter require plugins which is not ideal. 

The solution has some user interface difficulties when conducting environment collections. 

It is important to be careful when storing information to ensure files are secure and not lost. Storing information can be a bit hectic. 

I have been using the solution for one year. 

The solution is stable and provides a good user experience. 

The solution is scalable. 

The initial setup is quite easy because installation automatically sets up collections. 

Our company implemented the solution which requires manually writing the process. 

The solution has a licensing fee which might be prohibitive.

There are open source options that are cost effective and offer API testing such as JMeter. 

If JMeter is too restrictive based on your project, then I suggest moving to the solution. 

We use the solution for attrition and single user testing of APIs. 

We use JMeter for automated API testing and load testing for multiple users. 

The solution requires an awareness of APIs, JSON format, XML format, schema, and Java scripting. 

I rate the solution a nine out of ten.