Postman vs SwaggerHub comparison

"One of the most valuable aspects of Postman is scalability. We can scale the collection and for the multiple repositories of the collections."

"The most valuable feature is that JavaScript can be included as tests."

"The initial setup is simple."

"Postman helps us to automate the API testing in the team."

"Simple to use and you can easily store your projects."

"I like that it is very easy to use. I also like the automation feature."

"I have enjoyed using parameters and setting parameters while powering directly."

"The product is easy to implement."

"The most valuable features are the collaboration between multiple teams and the control and distribution of specifications."

"It is quite a useful tool. It is quite good with the validation of the spec. It works quite well in terms of errors and conformity to the OpenAPI standard. It is better than Visual Studio Code in terms of editing."

"It is a stable solution."

"One of the best features of SwaggerHub is how it allows me to create APIs and control the evolution of APIs within an organization."

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

"The scalability is endless."

"I rate the solution's stability a ten out of ten."

"You can click & play and add the notation in a human-readable form. Spotlight is also very good in the graphical design of APIs."

"Something that could be better is the inclusion of another type of test, for example, end-to-end tests."

"UI testing needs to be added to the solution."

"We'd like to see some better UI in newer versions."

"They should provide more specific documentation on configuration."

"Reporting can be better. If you have bigger APIs, it takes time."

"An area that needs some improvement would be to allow multiple windows with different collections to be open at the same time."

"The reporting could be better. It should give you a detailed PDF report after you run a test."

"I would like to see advanced automation in reference to Postman."

"More integration and usability with the cloud microservices would be nice"

"We have to use additional tools to test APIs."

"The review process should be improved. There seem to be some gaps, at least for us, for the editing part because we would like to have a full request review mechanism. They support some comments, but it is really hard to manage those comments. We would like to use the full request. Therefore, we are now looking to integrate with repositories. It has integration with Bitbucket and GitHub, but we have some internal constraints, and we need to move some of the repositories to GitHub. Our source code is on-premise in Bitbucket, and it was a bit of a problem for us to integrate. Now we are transitioning our repositories to GitHub, and hopefully, we can enable the integration. This will probably solve the problem with the review and approval. Its customization should also be improved. There are limitations around the support for the developer portal. There should be more customization options for the website that you can use as a developer portal. Currently, it has only Swagger UI with minimal customization. You cannot actually add additional pages and documentation for explaining concepts and general things. That's why we have started to look around to see what other tools are doing. They should also allow tagging on the API. We would like to add some tagging on the API to reflect certain things. Currently, any metadata that you would like to have has to be a part of the spec. You cannot do anything else. It should also have support for Open API 3.1, which was released at the beginning of the year. It would be great to be able to switch to that."

"SwaggerHub could be improved with better integration for tools."

"Some areas of SwaggerHub that could be improved include the interface between the code editor and the visual editor, the integration with private APIs, which currently requires an upgraded account."

"It could be more intuitive compared to one of its competitors."

"The scalability aspect of SwaggerHub can be improved. It becomes a bit unreliable when the load is increased and isn't up to par with expectations for scalability."

"SwaggerHub's UI needs to be improved as it looks very old school."

"We use the open-source version. They introduced a new licensing model where your company must subscribe to their services if you're using it for business purposes. However, I think they charge too much if you're only using the basic features. It limits what your organization can do if you're not a paying customer."

"The solution's price is reasonable."

"I rate the product's price a nine or ten on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is very expensive. Postman is an expensive tool for Turkey."

"We do not pay any money for Postman."

"Postman is an open-source product. It is free to download from Google."

"It is free."

"The solution has a licensing fee which might be prohibitive."

"This solution offers a free version."

"It has a yearly subscription, but I am not sure."

"The tool is cheap."