Postman Reviews

We are using it to test the API service for the GET and the POST. For this type of test, it is working properly for the APIs. It tests for the minimum usage of Postman. Also, if developers insist in collections, then we can share these collections as well.

1. We can test APIs. We know if they are functional or throwing any errors. 
2. We can use the code for performance testing.

• It is easy to use.
• It's free.
• It's user-friendly. Anybody can learn it within five to seven minutes. 
• We are using the automation and performance testing tools. 

We would like to create an entire suite where we can check the contents of the definition, like the server file. It should be able to check the records and compare them to the regression testing more on the automation side.

We cannot see transaction times in the product.

You can send it multiple tests at one time.

We have not used technical support yet.

The initial setup was very straightforward. It was easy to install, because it is a very lightweight application.

It is free.

I am searching for other options now.

We started using this solution because we have a requirement to do more integration testing and automated regression testing.

Most important criteria when selecting a vendor:

• Saves time.
• Creates automate processes.
• Easy to use.
• Easy to understand.
• Provides knowledge transfer.
• Less coding involved.
• Does not take up a lot of memory.
• Cost.

We are using Postman for testing APIs. It is simple, easy to use and a good tool.

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

I have been using Postman for two to three years.

Postman is a stable solution.

The scalability of Postman is good.

I have not had any experience with technical support.

The initial setup of Postman is straightforward. Setup is easy and you install it on your PC just like any other application from the browser.

Postman is a good, easy-to-use, and simple tool. I give Postman a nine out of ten.

We used Postman to test APIs before implementing them. We used the latest version of Postman, and it was deployed on a private cloud, AWS.

It is one of the important tools in API testing, and it helped out team develop mobile apps. First, it allowed us to understand the working and performance of the APIs so we could know how long it takes to give a response and analyze. Then, if there were any problems, we fixed them and implemented them in the code.

The best thing about Postman is it was very easy to use, and we could test APIs and get immediate results. In addition, we could share all our APIs with our other developers securely.

It is not that easy to use and should have a more improved easy-to-use interface.

It was stable, and there were no issues.

We didn't use any other solution before Postman. A senior developer suggested Postman.

It was straightforward to install. We just downloaded it and used it as a tool for testing our APIs. We had a back-end developer and two mobile developers utilizing this solution.

Its usage depends on how many APIs we have to test. So we had a complete collection of APIs that we tested, and once we tested, everything was ready.

There are no licensing costs, and we used it for free.

I rate this solution a six out of ten because no solution is perfect, and every software has missing features. Postman should consider adding more features in the future.

Regarding advice, don't mix up all the endpoints and organize your collections according to the use case. It will be very helpful for other developers to understand the use of the APIs.

Our company uses the solution as a developer platform for testing APIs. Our backend team develops APIs which are then pushed to the solution for QA testing and configuration. 

It is very easy to create and manage different environments for testing. We can plug in different URLs and variables to test in a local environment before going to production. 

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

Multi-part requests should be handled in the octet-stream subtype which provides responses in chunks for files that can be downloaded and viewed. We had an issue with multi-part requests recently and had to fix it. 

I have been using the solution for four years. 

The solution is stable with no issues. We have never experienced a problem or crash. 

The solution is scalable. An improvement to the octet-stream will enhance scalability for testing APIs. 

I have not escalated questions to support. One time I experienced an issue switching URLs in our environment, but haven't experienced it since. The solution's developers and QA team are continuously improving the product. 

The setup was really easy and was accomplished by configuring our email. 

Different projects automatically sync to the solution upon login so we are able to import files and configure API setups for other team members. 

We implemented the solution in-house and there is no maintenance because continuous updates are provided. 

I use the solution and other team members use Swagger. 

The solution is a great tool for managing APIs and should be used by developers and QA teams. It performs important testing for understanding how APIs work or whether any bugs exist and can be used to set up product domains. 

I rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

We use the solution for API testing. 

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

The tool needs to have a reporting feature. 

I am using the tool for three years. 

The tool's free version is scalable. My company has about 100 users for the tool.

I never contacted the support team. Instead, I resorted to online help. 

The product's setup is easy. 

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

I would rate the tool an eight out of ten. The product's features are simple. You will figure out to use the solution on your own. The tool is not hard to setup. 

The solution is used for testing APIs, building monitors, and scheduling everyday runs to check API health.

Environment variable setup, pre-request script, tests, and monitors are most helpful.

The initial setup is simple. 

The Postman monitor will give the pass and fail status in the console. It could serve better if there is a downloadable report which gives tabular details of response time against each API and a pass/fail count (graphical representation) after the monitor runs.

The performance needs to be improved. Postman application freezes when a whole lot of APIs run under a collection.

I have been using this solution for two years.

Observed performance issues when used excessively. The application freezes and needs a restart. The response of the app is slow while running a collection with a lot of APIs.

We do have some interaction with technical support. They are responsive and knowledgeable about the product.

Positive

I used SoapUI previously. I found Postman to be more interactive and accessible compared to SoapUI.

It's a very straightforward solution to install. I'd rate the process five out of five in terms of ease of deployment. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

Our primary use case for the solution is data-driven testing for API. We get data from the environment, and we have some APIs to get the data.

The API testing features are valuable.

The solution could be more user-friendly and improve its documentation.

We have been using the solution for approximately one year.

The solution is stable.

We have not tested the extent of its scalability yet. Currently, ten people are using the solution in our organization.

We previously did not use other solutions.

The initial setup was complex because we had limited first-time user experience. I rate the setup process a six out of ten.

I rate the solution an eight out of ten. I advise users considering this solution to watch Youtube videos to bridge the documentation gap.

Our primary use case for Postman is API testing for our product. We haven't automated the request and response part yet, like how we used to do for automation scripts. Basically, we are just shooting the URL's and recording the response. As of now we have multiple API's and we are using the collection so that we can run it together in a single flow, like an automation execution.

Then we use the basic variables and the collection variables. We even saw that we have some additional validation through the response code and the status code, like if there is an expired date then we should be expecting 200 status codes. We are doing those kinds of things now. We have been using Postman for the API testing for two to three month.

The variables part is good. We can easily define the variables and we don't have to manually do a change every time, it gets automatically updated. Secondly, I like the validation feature which is required for our automation testing. This way we can see that our test case passed. I think we could add some more validation but we need to do more research on that. For example, how can we play with it and find the response code and the other statuses? We need to do more research on how we can validate the exact response and the code, and how we get the response messages.

We prefer Postman as it is the most usable solution. It's really accessible. We also use SoapUI for API testing. But we prefer Postman, based on the reviews, based on our research, and how easily the solutions are available if we get stuck somewhere.

In terms of what can be improved, I would expect extra features that would make our work easier.

I just saw that it's functioning is based on the machine. Meaning, 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. 

Other than that, I don't see anything more to improve. As it is now, I get for a return whatever I am expecting. That's why I gave it a seven or an eight. Because I'm not expecting much on that portion.

Because, we are mostly focused on that I would expect more validation points.

In terms of stability, it didn't crash or take time to load or anything like that. We did not face any issues with stability. It's a very old tool, so it's been used a lot. It gets daily usage.

Right now, two to three people are testing it and other people are joining in. We have individually different user ID's and we don't have to go chasing anything because we are using the free version now. Because we are not using the paid version I won't be able to see the scalability yet because we are just doing the basic stuff, such as a request hit and run.

The initial setup is very straightforward. We just have to download and do the setup. We already have the collection so we just have to share it with the teams and import the project. Furthermore, we didn't create the project and we had to do everything manually before creating the variables and still the installation was not complex.

We also use SoapUI.

On a scale of one to ten I would rate it an eight.