Apigee Reviews

I work for a medium to big size IT consultancy firm in Mexico, and I am in the innovation and interoperability division. Our main work here is to develop projects on interoperability platforms and KPI management, et cetera, and transition from a legacy system to micro-services. In the last year, I have worked on a project on migrating a very big telecom firm from several API gateways and API exposures to Apigee. They're centralizing all their API gateways into Apigee.

We are hoping to lay out the plan for migrating the first sprint of about 200 APIs starting in January. Originally, the plan was to start in December, but the project is so big that it was suffering from delays.

We are going to start doing the actual proxies and migration in January next year. The project consists of about 10-month long sprints. We are going to use all of next year on this first phase. During the course of the next year, we are going to lay out the plan for the next phases. At this point, the total number of APIs to be migrated to Apigee is not clear, but we're thinking that it's about 300, 400 APIs that are going to be migrated.

The solution is deployed on-premise. They're thinking that in the second phase, they're going to go hybrid to have some of the features in the public cloud and some in the proprietary. 

We are integrators.

I think the most valuable features are the security features. Of course, the user access control is the same as the security. The other very important issue is the sandboxing capability of Apigee.

The caching capabilities are somewhat limited. This is more on the developer-oriented capabilities.

At this point, we aren't sure of what else could be improved since we are migrating some pieces of code that are really legacy and really difficult to model as a standard REST API. We are not sure in which areas Apigee is going to fall short. I think that next year we will have a more clear picture of some issues that we are going to find that could be addressed by a new feature, or by enhancing some existing feature in the next versions of the tool.

I have been using Apigee for one year.

Right now, in the development area of Apigee, we have about 20 developers, architects, et cetera. We are in the process of training because our expected growth drives us to have about 100 developers by the end of next year. I think that by the end of Q1, next year, we're going to double our capacity. By mid-year, we have to have 20 more, and so on, until the end of the year. We are planning to have about 100 trained developers, or configuration experts, in Apigee.

All the infrastructure, the enablement, is being done by another company. They are in charge of all the dimensions and actually creating all the infrastructure to host the platform. I have never installed Apigee as a proprietary cloud. I have been working either on the pure cloud environment or hybrid environment. I didn't phase the deployment of the tool, just the configuration.

In Latin America, Apigee is expensive. It's not for small businesses; it's more for big businesses. That's why I was trying to compare, for example, WSO2 against other API management tools. We are trying to create an inside practice in our company to also recommend WSO2 for a mid-size or small-size company where maybe the Apigee pricing for them is too heavy.

Apigee prices are targeting medium to large companies in Mexico. In Latin America, it's basically the same.

I would rate this solution 9 out of 10. 

I think the correct roadmap should be first an approach to Google to create a partnership. Then create a team of developers and an architect, and then start adding more resources as the demand grows.

One of our use cases for Apigee was when we were exposing a legacy application that we were using in the past.

As of now, we have not found anything major that needs improvement. It is not something that we are heavily using, it's something that is still in the process of being adopted company wide.

Maybe securing the APIs could be a little bit more straightforward. There might be some room for improvement in the process of securing the applications that we're exposing through the API. We would like additional documentation on this or some examples of how to do it. Overall, we have had to invest more time than expected to do that setup.

It would be good if the Apigee management allowed us to be able to consolidate many operations into a single one for the gateway functionality.

It has been two years that I am using Apigee.

It is stable.

It is scalable.

We have around four users.

There is a team of less than five people for deployment and maintenance.

As of now, we are going through a consolidation process within the company. Oliver Weyman is part of a larger group of companies. We are among the first ones to use it, but the plans for it are still not outlined for the next year, at least. This is something that we will finish figuring out within the next few quarters.

Support is good.

At the beginning the initial setup was very straightforward, but the fine tuning during the setup is something that needs some improvement. The initial setup was pretty straightforward because we were trying not to do very complicated things. The initial setup was easy. But then as we started to grow, we realized that there was some room for improvement, but overall the initial setup was easy and we liked that.

Since it initially started as a POC and then we started moving forward from there, it was not complicated. But had we started with a real life application or with more complex applications or requirements, it probably would have been more difficult for us. But the way that we decided to start and also because of the complexity level, it allowed us to go very smoothly with the first setup and deployment.

The implementation was all internal.

Normally the company tends to do agreements with the vendors, where we are trying to get everything in one single license so as not to add complexity to the licensing. That's what I recommend.

The company started evaluating solutions and we found that we have three other options. One of them was Mashery, the other one I don't remember the name, and the last one was SAP. The company decided to go for Apigee and now there are no plans to go to something else because the process that we take to evaluate and assess the solution is a very thorough process. We try to spend as much time as possible evaluating the pros and cons of the solutions and what issues might come up.

My advice to anyone considering Apigee is to start small and then grow from there. Try not to start migrating big, meaning to consolidate many applications into one single one. I would say to start small and try to run some POCs to make sure that they understand the fine tuning. Because the initial setup was easy but the one thing that needs time is the fine tuning of the setup. That, as I said before, is something that is really important for security. The security is something that I would recommend people look at.

On a scale of one to ten, I would give Apigee a nine out of 10.

I am API architect. We are service providers and provide API solutions to our customers.

Apigee provides out-of-the-box policies, so it is ready to use with minimal configuration to those policies. You can govern your API and manage the life cycle of the API completely with the Apigee tool.

You can use the documentation through the API portal and integrate it with the open API specification, and then design and create your API process.

When we compare Apigee with Mulesoft, we find that Mulesoft provides many out-of-box connectors to your legacy applications and it is now part of Salesforce. It was acquired by Salesforce. It has hundreds of soft connectors available and an exchange place where you can put your reusable assets. A similar kind of thing is available in Apigee as well, where developers start putting their assets which can be reused.

Right now we can create custom policies using Java scripts and other supported languages. That's the good thing. But if you are supposed to have created some APIs that are available on the market as public, it would be good if you can share it. It would give a bit more flexibility and then connect configurations that you can do on your own which are not supported by APIs.

From a connector perspective, it would be good if it could allow you to create a custom connector, or it could provide out-of-box connectors, or some in the backend. That would be great.

I have been working with Apigee almost five years.

Apigee is an excellent product.

The scalability depends on your configuration. You can make it scalable.

Other vendors are basically giving more. For example, Azure. Azure is cloud-based, so they offer many things, including client support and hosting. So if you take Azure for all your storage and hosting, then they are inclined to use their API data solution. Similarly, MuleSoft provides you many things. It is an ESB kind of service broker, so you can connect to many varieties of backends. It supports that, so they can use Mulesoft API. Apigee provides a number of out-of-the-box policies and it handles the API governance. But if are looking for an end-to-end solution, Apigee is a bit behind. But if it is combined together with Google Cloud, and if the Google cloud offerings are comparable to Azure, then probably Apigee will lead.

Technical support is very good. In my previous company we had on-premise Apigee installed. For that we reached out to customer support. It was excellent. And while deploying it to our customer side, we reach out to them, for both Mulesoft and Apigee. And it has a very good community portal. Customers have shared their experiences troubleshooting - their challenges, issues, and resolutions. It was good.

We have used Mule API, Mule API Gateway, and API Manager.

The initial setup is pretty simple.

It provides some sort of integral service communication support. We have a multiple API proxy with multiple APIs currently deployed. So if API A is calling API B, and API B is calling API C, if that left to right communication is also available in API B, for that we have to use some kind of service tool. That is also available inside Apigee.

Apigee is more of an entry level solution that does basic things pretty well, but if you want to go more customizable, you want to really look for another solution.

My general advice is, suppose you have minimal organizational and transformation requirements, and you have an all HCTP backend with no processing required, then definitely you should go for Apigee, because Apigee provides all those things out of the box. It can protect your backend from any penetration threat and you can integrate it with your identity provider for security. All those things are provided by Apigee. Suppose you have very, very little request response, it does not require much transformation. In that case, you can use Apigee. But if it requires a huge transformation and lots of calculations and business logic is involved, in that case, you have to go for where you can write your custom logic, so for that you should go for a Mulesoft kind of solution.

On a scale of one to ten, I would give Apigee an eight.

If the budget is not a concern then I will choose to go with Apigee over WSA-2, but if it is then I would prefer the latter solution. Apigee is quite pricey. The price is a thorny issue as there is little room for negotiation. 

Unlike WSA, Apigee does not have a partnership model, something which makes it a bit easier for companies such as ours to go with the former solution. 

While I cannot comment definitively on the partnership issue, as the company has yet to get back to me, I can say that this issue and the one of the pricing are why I choose to rate the solution as a six out of ten. 

The stability is fine. 

Apigee has better scalability than WSA. 

While the technical support seems fine, I cannot comment on this with certainty, as we did not go ahead with implementation of the solution. Had we gone ahead with a partnership with Apigee, then I would be in a better position to do so. 

If the budget is not a concern then I will choose to go with Apigee over WSA-2, but if it is then I would prefer the latter solution. Apigee is quite pricey. The price is a thorny issue as there is little room for negotiations.

If the budget is not a concern then I will choose to go with Apigee over WSA-2, but if it is then I would prefer the latter solution. Apigee is quite pricey. The price is a thorny issue as there is little room for negotiations.

Unlike WSA, Apigee does not have a partnership model, something which makes it a bit easier for companies such as ours to go with the former solution.

Apigee has better scalability than WSA. 

We are customers of Apigee.

I rate Apigee as a six out of ten because of its pricing. 

I use it at home to scan my local drive for malware or viruses. 

I like Apigee's automatic plates.

Apigee's user interface could be more straightforward and have more options. Also, it would be nice if it were ready to work out of the box without so much configuration. Regarding features I'd like to see, they could add self-recovery from the last hour, the last day, etc.

I've used Apigee for around five years.

The stability and performance are both pretty good. However, I have an FFD disc, so I don't see the scans anymore. They're all done overnight.

The version I'm using isn't scalable. It's not the professional version. 

I have never called Apigee support. I haven't had any issues.

Installing Apigee is very simple and only takes two or three minutes.

The home version is completely free.

I rate Apigee seven out of 10. It's a good tool, but not a fantastic tool. I use it because it's simple, it automatically updates, and It hasn't given me any issues. 

We are customers of Apigee. 

This solution offers a lot of flexibility in its features. Other tools like IBM Data Power have limited capability when it comes to features like data control, VPN management and monitoring. 

I think the portal could offer a better user experience. It's functional and does what it's supposed to but it's not user friendly. I'd also like to see better routing features. Currently routing is limited and the setup is complicated. From a VPN management perspective, I think we would like to have more user training available, particularly for advanced users, without having to pay. There is generally a learning curve for advanced usage and configuration, and troubleshooting is a steeper curve. Whenever we have an issue, we're dependent on support. We'd like our personnel to be better trained by Apigee so we can handle issues in-house. 

I've been using this solution for six months. 

The solution is stable and, from an enterprise perspective, it can handle volume which is important for us. 

We have good support from Google. They provide onsite support and everything is available to us. We are happy with the support.

The initial setup is quite easy. 

I recommend this solution. Apigee offers a month free usage so you can play around and explore the product and then make a decision. We had a good opportunity to test things out before purchasing the solution. 

I rate this solution an eight out of 10. 

I'm a developer as well as an architect. We have internal clients as well as external clients. We have other teams within the enterprise that use this platform. They do development, and sometimes, we do development for them. Then we host these solutions in the same infrastructure. We also have external clients who want to integrate their applications with us.

We've been having point-to-point connections with external vendors. It has actually helped us to be able to integrate our internal applications with external vendors. It is more like a single point of entry into the enterprise. Initially, we used to have the vendor directly interact with the application owners, but now, we come in between as an integration partner for external vendors. All integration has to go through us, which makes management as well as security simpler.

We have been using Apigee mostly for proxy FGIs. We also use its security features as well as traffic control features.

In terms of the functionalities of a typical API gateway, Apigee is actually doing its job, but when it involves integration with backend applications, which some gateways have, I don't believe it has this functionality. You have to do Java or do some other low-level coding before you are able to do the integration.

Apigee has a lot of components, which means that management will be a bit difficult. It probably has ten different components, and all of these components leverage open-source utilities, such as NGINX. When those open-source vendors upgrade their utility, Apigee usually lags behind because they need to do a lot of tests and any required development in their own platform. They need to do rigorous testing to make sure that nothing breaks. Because of that, it takes them a while to upgrade whatever components have been upgraded by the open-source vendor that owns the utility. We've been chasing them for a particular upgrade for well over a year and a half, and they have not done that upgrade. It is creating a security risk for us as an enterprise, but that upgrade has not been done, even though the open-source vendor, the owner of the utility, has upgraded it a long time ago.

We've been using this solution for four years.

It has been a very stable platform. We've not really had any production issues. We've not had any issues where the production environment went down, and we were not able to use it at all. 

We've not really had so many issues. Whenever we had issues, sometimes, they responded quickly, and sometimes, it took them a while to get back to us, but it has not really affected the business because we usually have development issues or issues that don't cause an outage. 

It is not straightforward. It has multiple components, so setting it up is not straightforward, but the good thing about this is that they have automated a lot of the setup. It comes as an appliance or in RPM packages that you can install at specific locations in the operating system. So, its installation is easy because it has been automated.

Because of the multiple components it has, if you are trying to implement this in your environment, you need people who are experienced in most of these open-source utilities, such as NGINX, Drupal, OpenAL, etc. You would require someone knowledgeable in those utilities to be able to support the environment.

I would rate Apigee an eight out of ten.

We use Apigee to share open data for the government. It was a pilot project for one of the  government teams who wanted to start the journey of open data.

The capabilities are very powerful.

Support of integration is what is most challenging in Apigee, as well as the complexity of the components. When setting up an environment, you have many components with open-source content.

When there is an update on a new version or an automatic update, you have to be present and double-check that the update is reflected in the environment with no issues.

The implementation should be easier.

We implemented Apigee six months ago.

Apigee is stable. We have approximately 1,000 users.

This is a scalable solution.

Technical support is very good.

To construct the environment, can take two to three weeks.

The presentation is based on the business and can be done in three to four months.

The iicense is subscription-based.

I would recommend this solution to others who are interested in using it.

It's a very good product. I would rate Apigee a ten out of ten.