Apigee Reviews

It is a Google cloud solution for API management and analytics.  

I have not had the opportunity to completely explore the product's capabilities in the time that we have been using it. But I can say that the customization is really vast and it is a really good feature built into the product. I can customize different authentication methods and methods for authorization. I can also use redaction. So security is flexible to our needs and it works well.  

It is a user-friendly solution, but it would help if Google could provide a container-based solution instead of just a standalone one. With a container-based deployment and support for Terraform, it would be better for our deployments and that would be great. Right now we have to configure different areas manually. Some areas can be automated, but the deployments are not as fully automated as they could be otherwise. 

so, they currently have a software as a service offering or a standalone offering. I want to see something like a hybrid cloud deployment. I also want to see a private cloud deployment. 

We are still building out the environment. We are running four environments until we accept that it is fully tested. So we are not live yet and we will really go live and into production sometime in the first quarter of next year. But we have been using Apigee within the last 12 months for testing purposes.  

The scalability of the product is good. Our use case is right now is applied in only one environment. When we are about to go to production, we will probably do high-availability testing with a dual environment so we can come up with any potential scalability issues. But for now, we have not really touched that area in our testing.  

We do have a lot of people using Apigee already. This is the primary gateway for us to talk to external applications. I would say that services around 800- 900 applications which are using the gateways. That is also involving many teams and end-users who access those applications.  

My recommendation for installations is that the product installation, set up and delivery process could be improved. It is straightforward in the initial steps. The part which is automated by Google is very straightforward. The remaining part, we have to do manually. The remaining components have to be manually configured. If Google were to do a container offering of this solution, then adopting it would be seamless because everything would be able to be automated.  

I would say that it currently takes too long to set up and deploy and that it is not as short a time to complete the process as it should be. It is more mediocre, somewhere in the middle, and has moderate difficulty instead of being seamless and simple.  

We did not have to use an integrator, reseller, or a consultant for deployment. It was all done in house by our own teams.  

We tried Axway API gateway and we also tried MuleSoft. We found that these solutions did not fit our scenario as well as Apigee because our scenario is a very special scenario where we want to keep everything that we already have on board. In our current situation, we have big AWS (Amazon Web Services) accounts and a big AWS footprint. So we want to also be able to use AWS for Apigee hosting. That is where our environment and needs become a little bit of a custom scenario. Apigee works for us in this scenario and that is why we ultimately went with Apigee over other products.  

I would definitely recommend this product over any other products available in the market in this category. It has all the features necessary to work in anything from a basic scenario to advanced applications. So I find that everything in it is flexible and available in this one product. Because of that I highly recommend it to anyone.  

On a scale of one to ten (where one is the worst and ten is the best), I would rate Apigee around an eight out-of-ten.  

We primarily use the solution for all of our security. There are a few use cases for us where we use it to protect API to third parties.

The solution, overall, is quite good.

The product has a few restrictions I'd prefer weren't there.

We have trouble finding use cases. For example, when we google "data locator" we can't find a use case scenario at all. We can't find more than, approximately, five use cases, however, we need more.

We needed to do more than 20 configurations, and we weren't able to do that as the limit is 20 on the solution.

The solution tends to hide the limitations to keep selling the product. I can't blame them for doing it, however, it makes it difficult for those of us who eventually sign on.

The solution is expensive.

I've been dealing with the solution for close to three years at this point.

The stability of the solution is good. There aren't issues surrounding bugs or glitches. We don't find that it crashes or freezes. It's pretty reliable.

The scalability of the solution is okay. If a company needs to scale it, it should be able to do so.

Currently, we only have about ten people on our team that use it.

We haven't found the technical support to be that good, to be honest. We're not completely satisfied with the level of service.

We're currently using IBM Connect as well as Azure. Functionality-wise, there aren't too many differences. One is on-premises, however, therefore it's really difficult to compare both together. With IBM, you have to maintain a few more things. There are more administrative tasks.

The initial setup wasn't straightforward. It was complex due to the fact that Apigee didn't have any integrations and we had IBM APA Connect Resources.

There were many things we weren't told earlier. Once you clear certain items you can't change the name, for example. There were a few other items, like monitoring, which had a limited number of configurations which was an issue.

Deployment was fairly quick. It only took five minutes or so.

The solution is not a cheap product. Licensing can be quite expensive.

Our contract is around $2 million for three years.

We don't have a clear picture how the billing works. We have one service package of one size and yet we don't have a clear picture of the purchase or the status or if they will charge more due to earlier limits on services. The solution needs to make licensing more clear. Even if they charged us $10,000 or even $20,000 more but they were clear about the what and the why, we'd be okay with that. We'd just like to know.

We're just a customer. We don't have a business relationship with the company.

We are removing our IBM products and transition completely over to Apigee.

We have Azure's API as well. In next one year or two year, we are going to dissolve IBM API Connect as well as Azure CIM and move everything to Apigee.

Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I'd rate Apigee at an eight. We'd rate it higher, however, they aren't clear on their offering. We just want everything automated and easy. The cost is not the issue. The lack of information is.

I'd recommend the solution. It's a nice product and companies should go ahead with it, so long as they are okay with the pricing, as it is rather expensive. If a company is cost-consious, IBM API Connect may be better as the licensing costs are lower.

We've got quite a large technology footprint and I'm looking after the integration of our banking platform with our payment systems.

The REST API allows for faster user engagement.

The flexibility allows you to quickly run a cloud-native application architecture.

The ability to work across different management solutions in a plug and play fashion would make it easier for faster uptake.

Pricing is an area that can be improved, as it is a little on the higher side. It is more expensive when you compare to open-source products or other vendors.

I think it would be helpful if Apigee had support for voice-activated activities, rather than having to type.

More intelligence in terms of being able to learn from previous activities would be a good addition in the future.

I have been using Apigee for about two years.

Apigee is used on a daily basis in our payment systems.

It has performed relatively well from a scalability perspective.

We have about 15 users in the company. They are a mixture of engineers, architects, and administrators, with the majority being architects.

In cases where we have a problem and need support, we have an agreement in place with the vendor to help us navigate through it. They are good and respond to our issues quickly.

Apigee was our first choice for this type of product.

The initial setup is of medium complexity. End-to-end, we took about a week to get everything ready. This included the account, the proxies, the target endpoints, etc.

We received assistance from the vendor for our implementation.

Our in-house team is responsible for routine maintenance. This includes backup support, uptime support, patching, applying of certificates, etc. It is an ongoing activity and we also work with the business to continuously improve the integration, so that they are getting the value of the capability of Apigee.

My understanding is that there are costs in addition to the standard licensing fees.

My advice for anybody who is considering Apigee is to first do research and an analysis of what they want to use it for, including specific use cases. It is a good tool but it is important to have well-defined requirements to avoid a high implementation cost and rework.

The requirements have to be very well documented and understood by all parties, especially those who will be involved in implementing it. Following this approach is an important step to getting a good return on investment.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We use Apigee every day. Because we have a backend system, we use Apigee to capture and track all of our transactions and for monitoring calls, which is the target for our client service. We then use this information to create a report and provide a price for each transaction. For this reason, we created a proxy that we use as an integration layer, like API management, which helps build applications. For that reason, each and every call goes through Apigee so that we can track and capture all of the information.

There are a few features that are quite interesting. We can provide our API developer with an API proxy to the developer portal, which comes in handy. There are also some interesting policies, like authentication where we normally provide any code and quotas and rate limit policies for protection. The administration and monitoring features are also quite useful as you can receive alerts and notifications and monitor them on a virtual dashboard. There are just a lot of security features in general.

With Apigee, we can easily monitor applications, and our core IT team informed me that installing upgrades is very simple. We also have a portal where we can share our proxies with the convenors, which is quite useful. 

When compared with other products and tools in the market like MuleSoft or other API management solutions, I see some lagging in regards to integration capacity — where we don't have all of the connectors. It's not the perfect ESB, it's only for API management solutions. For example, MuleSoft will provide you with the API management solution as well as ESB, allowing you to integrate with large, complex IT systems. So, there is some lagging there that needs to be fixed. 

The main area they should improve is the integration capability. They should have useful connectors that we can use to provide code so that we can integrate with other systems. This needs to be improved.

When compared to other products, such as MuleSoft and other tools in the market, Apigee has some lagging issues. 

Over the last three years, we haven't had any issues with the stability, both on-premise and on the cloud. It's a stable solution. We haven't experienced any error-value from the product.

Product-wise, we don't have any technical support, our IT team takes care of it. We also have a number of applications we are managing, but only two recruiters are monitoring them.

It's easy to create proxies in Apigee. Compared to other integration tools, we can quickly and easily export any APIs in Apigee, which saves us a lot of time. 

The setup was taken care of by our core IT team, I was part of the development team so all activities relating to the setup, updates, and customer service were handled by the core IT team.

We would definitely recommend Apigee. You can use Apigee to create proxies (and share API proxies with consumers), monitor calls, and provide security for particular endpoints. We have a complete telephone portal under Apigee, I would recommend it.

I would give Apigee a rating of seven or eight out of ten. The API moderation, administration monitoring, product architecture, infrastructure, and overall quality is good. The only area lagging is integration capability. 

We primarily use the solution as API Management, as both proxy and security.

The solution has improved our company's time to market. When we deploy a policy for a particular API, the creation of the policy and the gateway is significantly faster than what we were doing with our Layer 7 gateways. It's easier to develop the policy and to walk through the policy using the Apigee interface.

The ease of creating policies has been the most useful of the solution's features. It's a quick ramp-up time. It's easy for our support staff to implement the policies in the API management layer.

The company needs to better support webhooks. It used to support webhooks and their policies and they have since stopped. They had some issues in the product and they abandoned the support for them. It's not come back since. Webhooks are still used by some of our production partners. It would be nice to see the support for them come back. Right now, we have to pull the API instead of using a webhook to do the notification.

With Apigee, there are frequent updates, so they seem to have a very strong user base. 

There's a lot of users in Layer 7 too, but we've had some bad experience with support from the company. Stability-wise, it's hard to say. I don't think we've had any bugs associated with the gateway itself where the gateway has failed, but we've had support issues from Layer 7. 

In comparison, Google and Apigee have done a fantastic job supporting their product.

Scalability wise, I've heard from some customers that Apigee has some limitations on scalability, but we haven't experienced those as of yet.

As far as Layer 7 is concerned, it seems that the policies are very deterministic as to how the actual gateways function. Some of them have had a significant impact and we've had to scale up their clusters just to support a minimal load. Some are disappointed with the number of services that we have to engage for Layer 7, and the number of clusters we've had to create. We've had to create a pretty large cluster for supporting some applications.

The Layer 7 gateway's front end is for a high-end brand product. We have the largest loyalty program in Canada. Our PC Optimum program, for instance, uses our Layer 7 gateways. There are 14 million users that use the PC Optimum card that goes through those gateways.

The initial setup of Apigee is straightforward. Google/Apigee gives us all the information to support their private owned clouds. The interface is very straightforward to use as well. It's a lot easier than the Layer 7 product.

CA was overly complex in its configuration. CA also does significantly more as far as security and policies are concerned. It has developed a huge number of policies into their product. It's way more than what I would expect an API management product to be. It took us two months to set up the solution.

We basically took the policies from Layer 7 that we had previously created and we transformed them to policies for Apigee. That was fairly easy.

In terms of deployment, we haven't transformed totally from Layer 7 yet to Apigee. Our support is very low on Apigee right now. There's only one person that's working on Apigee currently. It's minimal. Accenture is handling the support, as they did for CA. We had about five people supporting the gateways on Layer 7.

For Apigee, we had the assistance of an integrator. The company was Accenture, and we have a good working relationship with them. They're currently supporting the platforms in many facets. The deployment was straightforward, so they didn't need to do too much.

There was no specialization or skill required for them for Apigee, but there was with Layer 7.

We looked at a couple of other vendors. We looked at offerings by Red Hat and some others. We basically looked at the market leaders.

From an enterprise point of view, our digital division had already migrated to GCP. GCP uses Apigee by default. They had selected Apigee initially. That was one factor in choosing Apigee over CA. Another factor is that it would support on-premises and it would support our Azure environment as well. The ease of use, creation of the policy, and the developer portal experience were all factors. The fact that developers could easily create the policies themselves without having to get our administration staff or engineers to actually create the policies was a big factor as well.

Right now, we are still in the process of testing the solution. We're using both on-premises and cloud versions.

CA has developed a sort-of enterprise service spot inside of their API management platform. It does interesting things with files, and it has a lot of security features that are not normally used in a majority of API calls. It's overkill. Its portal is very clunky and very difficult to set up. Its gateways and its policies are not straight forward either. It basically requires a three-day class to understand how to get in and add policies and it's not very simple to add policies into the CA Layer 7 gateway. Apigee does a way better job. 

CA is also owned by Broadcom now and when that transition happened, Broadcom did a lousy job of handing off support of that product. They basically fired everybody from CA. They left us without production support for a good part of a year. We've had CA for about 2 years and mostly we used the on-premises version, but we had a small amount on the cloud as well.

Because of these reasons, we're moving away from Layer 7 to Apigee.

In terms of advice to those considering using Apigee versus CA, I'd say they need to understand their use cases for APIs.

I would rate Apigee eight out of ten.

In comparison, I would rate CA five out of ten.

We just started with the solution and are learning about its functionality and use cases right now. It's a requirement in our company that we have a tool of this nature.

There is less CLI needed compared to other options. It's more user-friendly and easier to navigate. 

Everything is working well. We haven't had issues. 

The solution is stable and reliable. 

I don't have any notes for improvement. I don't need any extra features. 

I just began using the solution. 

The solution has been stable. We haven't had issues since we started using it. There are no bugs or glitches and it doesn't crash or freeze. 

We are using the latest version of the solution. We're new to the product. I'm not sure which deployment we are using. 

I'm a customer and end-user. I'd recommend it to others. So far, using it has been very helpful.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

This is our major service when we have services and need an API gateway. They allow us to expose these services to clients.

The solution offers good customization. It's very easy to customize in general. 

You can integrate with things very well. 

The caching is good.

You can add basic flows with ease. 

The Google CMS is a great tool. 

The solution is stable. 

Technical support has been decent. 

We are considering scalability regarding using a centralized environment, and the documentation seems to indicate it's not easy to integrate with Kubernetes or deploy into a cluster. 

It's not using SPA, single page applications, like Angular. 

There isn't very good monitoring right now. We need better performance monitoring.

We need it to offer better debugging, so if there is slowness in the flow, it's not easy to fix. You have to use other tools to debug.

I've used the solution for four years. 

The stability is good. I'd rate it nine out of ten. It is very reliable. There are no bugs or glitches and it doesn't crash or freeze. We've had no issues on this front. 

We have around eight people that directly work with the solution. They are four developers, two engineers, and two support staff. 

The scalability is good. I'd rate it five out of ten. It's deployed on the VM. You cannot scale up in some areas as you might hit a limit. Then, there are peak hours, and that might be different as well. You might hit a wall. 

We've dealt with technical support in the past. They've handled a few tickets. However, I have never directly dealt with them. I have not seen any complaints in regard to the service they provide. 

Positive

We did not use a different product previously. 

I didn't handle the deployment. I don't handle that aspect of the solution. 

We do have a team that manages and administers the solution. 

There might have been some assistance from the Apigee support team during implementation. 

The pricing isn't something that I deal with. I don't know the exact cost. 

We are currently looking into other solutions. We want to see how others stack up in terms of pricing, stability, scalability, et cetera. 

I am using the latest version of the solution. 

I'm not sure if I would recommend the solution to others. I still need to make comparisons between this and other options. I'm trying to decide if I should stick with Apigee or move to something else.  

So far, I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. It has a high rating on Gartner. 

We use it for API monitoring purposes, and for the management of KPM metrics around the APIs.

They need to work on the cost of the solution. But again, it depends on the use case. The use case which I have installed serves the intended purpose. I don't have any negative feedback on it.

We have been using the solution for the last six or seven years.

I am satisfied with the stability of the solution.

I have around 500-2000 users using the solution in my company. It serves the purpose of my use case.

There is no real technical support unless you have a problem with the servers or something gets lost. It is only when the service is down or there is some issue, there'll be a reply from them depending on your subscription.

The biggest advantage of the competitors over Apigee is cost. I would advise you to be careful due to its cost.

I would rate the solution a seven out of ten.

In my previous company, I used Apigee after modernization to manage client APIs.

Apigee is a great product with good feedback and recommendations from clients.

It is best to ask a developer about the areas for improvement in Apigee, as I'm a content writer, though the pricing for the product was a bit higher.

Apigee would also need developers or a dedicated team for deployment. I also found it challenging to manage sometimes.

My last project with Apigee last December.

Apigee is a stable product.

The company only used Apigee. It didn't use any other solutions.

As a writer, I didn't set up Apigee. Another team set it up.

Compared to other products, Apigee had higher pricing.

I used Apigee for my customer, but I no longer work for the company.

I'm a content writer and was involved in researching and creating documentation about Apigee for a client.

The majority of the clients had fifteen to twenty users of Apigee.

My rating for Apigee is seven out of ten.

The company was an Apigee partner.

We are a telecom-based organization, so our use cases are generally based on telecom functionalities like the MF APIs. I'm a technical architect and we partner with Google. 

Apigee is a front-layer gateway and it helps to improve our overall performance.
We can repair requests and respond to vacant needs and that's a big help to us. 

Many of the features available are valuable to us including out-of-the-box policies, the vacant creation, throttling and more. We are using authentication and authorization which are also good features. 

Integration should be improved as we'd be able to use solutions such as NewSoft or Del Boomi. It would be helpful if Apigee would lower their licensing costs. I'd like to see a cloud-based solution and some new features similar to those available with TD cloud or Salesforce.

I've been using this solution for over six years. 

The solution is stable.

To date, our use cases have been limited so we haven't had significant scalability requirements. We have no plans for expanding the use of this product. 

On a number of occasions we've needed some immediate help or a quick turnaround, but the technical support response was quite slow. 

Neutral

Initially, we figured out how to deploy the solution on the job and it required some external assistance, but because we've been working with Apigee for so long, deployment is relatively easy for us these days and is carried out in-house. 

Apigee has so many servers nowadays that are based on requirements. Much of the information is available on Apigee documentation which is good. 

I rate this solution eight out of 10.