Amazon API Gateway Reviews

We mainly use these APIs for east-to-west communication within our internal system and partner collaboration. While most companies prefer tool-based API management for partner collaboration, for internal consumption, and integration between application insight, we tend to use cloud-native tools provided by AWS.

The most valuable features are the standard ones that APIs offer. Depending on the requirements, Azure API management's throttling feature is used for continuous consumption. Otherwise, we rely on the default features available. 

Since it is mainly for internal communication, we haven't received any concerns or requests for better tools or additional features. The initial tools provided by Amazon API Gateway suffice for our needs.

The only issue we've noticed is a lack of awareness when it comes to partner collaboration. Customers prefer using separate API gateways for scalability. Apart from that, feature-wise, most API management solutions offer similar features and learning resources on how to use them.

The pricing could be improved. In cases where customers require real-time sync or real-time calling groups with IoT, the volume of data and time lag become a concern. AWS charges for data ingress and egress, which could be further reduced. This would be helpful for customers dealing with large amounts of data coming in or going out from their systems. So, improving pricing for volume data transfer is something that can be considered, as it has been consistent feedback from customers.

It has been around four years since it became publicly available. We have tier-one partnerships with all the hyperscalers, including AWS, Azure, and GCP. 

It is a stable solution. I would rate the stability a nine out of ten.

I would rate the scalability a nine out of ten. It is very scalable, and we don't need to hire additional engineers.

Our clients are primarily enterprise businesses. We have a strong customer base in log integrations.

The support is good, especially if you are a premium partner with AWS or have active scalable support. If you have a tier-one partnership, the support has been phenomenal. 

However, if the partnership is lower, it may take more time or have SLAs involved. But overall, the support team is more receptive than the infrastructure team. 

Positive

Currently, we mainly focus on cloud-native solutions. We have a couple of partnerships, including Dell Boomi and MuleSoft. We also had a customer requirement for Apigee design, so I was looking for a comparison between API management with cloud-native tools and their offerings. 

Generally, we recommend using API management provided by the Hyperscale industry, such as AWS, Azure, and GCP Virtual Desktop.

The initial setup is straightforward. With big data forms and CI/CD automation, it becomes very straightforward.

Most of the time, we have seen hybrid and cloud deployments being preferred by our customers. That has been the dominant use case for most of them.

The Amazon configuration IT process usually takes a couple of hours. If the requirements are clear and there are no additional requests from the customer's side, it's just a matter of a couple of hours to set up the new components for straightforward and simple requirements.

The pricing can be expensive depending on the use case. If there is a lot of data processing involved, it can become a costly solution. However, it is still better than other products available in the market. Since our customers are mostly large enterprises, they prefer not to go for open-source alternatives or cheaper limited services. They prefer to stick with what is available with the Hyperscale providers.

We use API tools from Amazon, Azure, and sometimes GCP depending on where the customer workloads are. For Azure, we use Azure EDP management, and for Amazon, we use generative VPN management. Most of our requirements revolve around Azure APM management and AWS APM engine.

The features we look at are mostly similar across the board. There aren't many differentiating factors. For example, in terms of orchestration, Azure offers step functions or Lambda functions, which are available in AWS as well. 

The customers tend to use the native features unless they need to work with different API gateways for scalability reasons. The only issue we've noticed is a lack of awareness when it comes to partner collaboration. Customers prefer using separate API gateways for scalability. Apart from that, feature-wise, most API management solutions offer similar features and learning resources on how to use them.

We would definitely recommend sticking to native solutions because then you have one Hyperscale provider supporting the applications, storage, compute, and APIs. 

Another aspect to consider is the security features within the API. If you need to collaborate outside the organization, there are numerous security features available through the Hyperscale provider that can be leveraged. 

However, if there is a very specific requirement that the native API Gateway doesn't fulfill, then you can explore other external products or solutions.

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

We use Amazon API Gateway to expose some APIs. I worked for three companies that mostly used API Gateway for exposed services and complex use cases like expose headers. The solution is used to personalize responses, provide more simulations, and facilitate communication between the services. The solution is also used to direct some requests to Lambda and ECS.

Amazon API Gateway can integrate with ECS and Lambda. With Amazon API Gateway, you can have massive integrations that are quickly integrated.

Amazon API Gateway is not as complete as Apigee and needs to be improved by adding more features to become a more robust application.

For some use cases, Apigee is more complete than Amazon API Gateway. With Apigee, you can integrate some endpoints with better latency. Apigee has the cloud EPG Microgateway resource, which can be put inside our Kubernetes cluster. Integration with Apigee can have more efficiency in terms of latency. Apigee is an enterprise architecture application wherein you can use a proxy.

I have been using this solution for about three years.

Amazon API Gateway is a good solution that works well most of the time. With Amazon API Gateway, I've not encountered unavailability or any issue that became a disaster.

You don't need to worry about the scalability of Amazon API Gateway because AWS takes responsibility for the solution's scalability.

I opened some tickets for use cases integrating with Lambda, and the technical support was very good. Most companies I work with use an enterprise plan from AWS. You open a chat, have your response, know what to do or what is wrong, and can resolve the problem. Amazon API Gateway's technical support is very efficient.

Positive

I have experience with Apigee.

Amazon API Gateway is very easy to set up. You can create a platform template using ChatGPT or write one with your hands.

My first Amazon API Gateway deployment took five to ten minutes. My boss requested me to expose the Lambda for internal use cases. I didn't have any experience with Amazon API Gateway at that moment, but I was able to expose the API, which was very, very easy.

In my previous company, they had a lot of people responsible for the solution's maintenance. Developers are responsible for personalizing the configurations inside Amazon API Gateway. They need to understand the requirements of the API and maximize site API. At that moment, I was responsible for having the permissions and putting the information in Amazon API Gateway. We need two or three people responsible for around 30 APIs and some developers.

Since it's a serverless solution, Amazon API Gateway is not so expensive. The pricing depends on the number of requests you have in your API, but it is adjustable. Amazon API Gateway is very good in terms of price because other solutions have a specific key price you need to pay monthly. However, with Amazon API Gateway, you pay for what you use.

If you use minimum requests inside Amazon API Gateway, you have to pay one to five dollars. However, if you have a lot of APIs, you have to pay $ 200 to $ 500. The pricing depends on how many requests you have.

If you use AWS services, do not hesitate to go for Amazon API Gateway. If you are not using AWS or if you are not AWS cloud-native, you can consider using other solutions like Apigee or Kong. If you are looking to have a serverless application, then you need to use it again.

Overall, I rate Amazon API Gateway an eight out of ten.

We primarily use the solution as an API gateway. The APIs are managed by serverless applications. It's an API gateway from Layer 7.

The integration with Comdata is very good.

The product is affordable.

It is easy to set up. It is also quick to deploy.

The solution is reliable. It is very stable. 

The solution can scale well. 

The solution could improve signature validation. They should offer signature validation if there is any request. There needs to be some sort of mechanism. They need to be able to validate the signature at the API gateway level. 

I've used the solution for about three years. 

The solution is stable and reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. There are no improvements needed. The performance is good. 

The solution is scalable. There's no problem if we need to expand. We have around 600 APIs working right now. We have plans to increase usage in the future. 

I did not use any other solution previously.

There are multiple ways to set up the solution. It's very simple and straightforward. 

The deployment shouldn't take too long, depending on the requirements. We can do it in just a minute. The work is very minimal. 

First, we set up the routes and set them up with the network, and in terms of integration, if there are any authentications needed, we do that as well. 

We do not need many staff members to handle deployment and maintenance. 

We can handle the setup ourselves. It's very easy.

We've seen value in using the solution. It is worth the money. 

The licensing is paid monthly. It's a minimal charge. It is very affordable. There are no extra costs. 

We did not evaluate other options. 

I am an end-user.

I've been using the latest version of the solution. 

I highly recommend the product. 

I'd rate the product ten out of ten. 

I use API Gateway to trigger Lambda functions, manage S3 objects, and direct traffic for my web applications. Everything I use is integrated with the API Gateway.

API Gateway has simplified integrating different AWS services for deploying applications, providing a streamlined approach.

The Cognito authorization integration is very useful, along with the easy multi-region integration and connectivity with various AWS services like SQS, SNS, and Lambda functions.

API Gateway could be more user-friendly, especially in defining routes for new users. A friend of mine had difficulty with understanding where the API Gateway stages were and whether they were deployed. An interface more friendly for new users would be helpful.

I have been using AWS services for a long time, possibly ten years.

I do not remember any issues or problems with the stability.

I did not use a different solution before API Gateway. Implementing an API outside AWS is more challenging, so API Gateway has made things much easier for me.

It is a really cheap product, but if used incorrectly, it can become expensive. Balancing your charges is crucial to control the costs.

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten.

I use the solution for API management. I use Amazon API Gateway for SQL Server Stretch Database.

The most valuable feature of the solution is that it is a stable solution with an uptime of 99.99 percent.

Amazon API Gateway is expensive, making it one of the product's shortcomings where improvements are required.

Amazon API Gateway needs to focus on minimizing latency.

I have been using Amazon API Gateway for a year.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

It is a scalable solution. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

Around ten employees in my company use the solution.

Considering that my organization is closed as of now, I can't comment on whether there are plans to increase the use of the solution in the company.

I have experience with the solution's technical support.

Apart from the cloud services offered by Amazon and Google, our company has not used any other products.

The product's initial setup phase was not complex.

At first, my company needed to deal with Amazon's authentication requirements, after which we put all our information in Amazon API Gateway. Then, we run the setup file and add the attribute data before we can finally operate it in our company.

The solution is deployed on the cloud.

The solution can be deployed in two hours.

Five technicians are sufficient to take care of the deployment and maintenance of the product.

My company sought an integrator's help to carry out the product's installation process.

The solution is expensive. Though the product was previously available at a cheap rate, nowadays it is expensive.

Amazon is the number one cloud service provider in the world.

I recommend the solution to others since it is a good product.

The benefit that I have experienced from using the solution stems from the fact that it is a secure and reliable product to use.

I rate the overall product a nine out of ten.

I use it to expose API. So, I primarily use it for publishing our APIs and implementing rate limiting.

We mainly use it within our internal services.

It eliminates the need for us to handle rate limiting ourselves.

It completely met our expectations. We have no issues with it.

Moreover,  integrating API Gateway with other AWS services was good. It worked out of the box, so it worked perfectly.

We heavily utilize AWS Cognito user pools and application authorization responses for authentication and authorization.

A lower price would definitely be an improvement. 

I would like to see more AI-based capabilities in future releases. 

I have been using it for more than three years. 

I would rate the stability an eight out of ten. 

I would rate the scalability an eight out of ten. We have thousands of end users accessing our solution built on API Gateway. Internally, around 100 people are involved in development.

We use it daily. 

The customer service and support are great.

Positive

I would rate my experience with the initial setup an eight out of ten, with ten being easy.

The deployment took a few minutes. 

The deployment was done in-house. One DevOps engineer is enough for the process. 

We don't need to maintain the solution. It just works. It does not require any maintenance. 

I would rate the pricing a five out of ten, with ten being expensive. 

We evaluated Microsoft Azure. We did a comparison. We decided to use all services from Amazon, like database deployment, etcetera. It was logical to continue using Amazon API Gateway because it fits better.

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

Our use case is we have some internal APIs that we need to expose to the outside world. Via API Gateway, we expose those APIs to the external world.

It is easy for integrations if it is deployed in AWS Services.

The setup is very simple. 

It is stable and reliable.

It can scale well.

We would like to see more UI-based monitoring.

I've been using API Gateway for around six months.

It's a stable, reliable product. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

We can scale the product. it's not a problem if we need to expand it. 

The solution was just recently deployed. We have about 1,000 new users on it. When were are fully operational, we will have about 10,000 users on the solution. We are still in the process of expanding usage. 

We've never had to reach out to technical support. Therefore, I cannot speak to how helpful or responsive they are. 

We also use Apigee from Google. 

We didn't switch from anything. This was a new requirement. Since all of our components are in AWS, we took the AWS API Gateway solution to make it easy for integration for all other AWS components.

The solution offers an easy initial setup. 

It takes two weeks to deploy the solution. 

We only need about two individuals to handle any maintenance tasks. We may need up to six people once we are fully up and running. We'll need one manager, two administrators, and two people for support.

We did the implementation in-house. We did not need outside assistance from consultants or integrators. We had people on our team that could do it.

We did evaluate other options before choosing this solution. 

I'd recommend the solution to other users and companies. If you are using AWS components, then it is a good product.

I'd rate the product eight out of ten.

We put the APIs behind an API gateway. Before the users hit the API, they must go through the Amazon API Gateway. We can control how people use our APIs. We use the tool to manage the entire API process.

Building an API gateway is not a simple process. It is good to use a managed service that is cost-effective. The solution is solid, robust, and scalable. It gets the job done.

We faced a few issues with the documentation. We had to figure out many things on our own, or we had to watch some videos. It would have been much easier if the documentation were a little clearer.

I have been using the solution for three years.

The tool is very stable.

All the employees who deploy applications use the product in our organization. We have about 100 users.

The tool is cloud-based. We have to configure it. It is not difficult. The configuration is straightforward. Everybody can do it. I rate the ease of setting up authorization and authentication mechanisms a seven out of ten.

The solution is worth the money.

The product is a little expensive. It's not free. However, the tool's cost is better than the cost of setting up our own gateway. It could be cheaper, though.

Amazon API Gateway is a solid service. Considering the cost of setting up an API gateway, it’s best to use Amazon API Gateway. Overall, I rate the tool an eight out of ten.