Microsoft Azure API Management Reviews

One of our applications went live a month ago, and it uses the whole suite of Microsoft APIs.

I like the support they provide for the APIs more than the solution itself. First of all, documentation-wise, both Microsoft Azure and even Google Cloud are up there. But in comparison, the real-time consulting and support for APIs make Microsoft stand out a little.

I also like the performance. Standard public cloud provider-built APIs are more resilient and flexible in terms of what feature you want to use and what feature you don't want to use, and they're more customizable. They are more resilient in terms of performance in that particular environment because that is the design aspect of the offering.

When public clouds build APIs and deploy them after testing them on their framework for a certain amount of time, I feel there is a massive difference in the product's performance. On the interface, everything is strong.

Specific to API development, I think Microsoft is still far behind AWS. AWS has grown by leaps and bounds, and Microsoft is a close second. But in terms of features and other stuff they provide, Microsoft's compatibility with publicly available APIs is a little limited. So, that is a little bit of a constraint. But what they provide is good, it's just that they need to build more on their API suite. I think Google is doing a really good job at that.

We have been using Microsoft Azure API Management for at least a year.

Microsoft Azure API Management is stable.

Microsoft Azure API Management's scalability is pretty good. At present, we have around 10,000 to 15,000 users. We are also evaluating the application, and we should grow in the cloud rapidly from now on.

Microsoft's support stands out. They provide good support in terms of consulting and operation support for their API. So, that is very helpful. Microsoft sometimes looks at the size of the customer, the way they are involved, and the size of the environment. They are also willing to go beyond periodically to consult on the best way to do stuff.

On a scale from one to five, I would give Microsoft technical support a four.

The initial setup wasn't entirely straightforward or altogether complex. It was somewhere in the middle.

On a scale from one to five, I would give the initial setup of Microsoft Azure API Management a three. For me, AWS is two, and Microsoft is three.

We did the deployment in-house, working directly with Microsoft.

Because of our partner relationship, our pricing is pretty decent. But in general, if I compare pricing, I think the initial offer that we got from Microsoft until the relationship kicked in was more expensive than AWS.

There were some unexpected expenses because we had to pause. This was due to our inexperience and because we were doing this significant public cloud migration for the first time. We were using SAP on a public cloud for the first time. 

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Microsoft Azure API Management an eight. 

We're a bank, so one of our primary use cases for API Management is integrating our API with third parties that provide financial policies. Sometimes they want to use our services, like payment and customer inquiry, so we give them access to the API gateway. 

Azure API Management allows you to control who has access to your API gateways and assign permission levels to third parties if you want integration with third-party solutions. That has a couple of advantages. Those third parties can directly access your API directly, and you can set limits. It can also configure authentication on other API managers.

An API gateway is like a platform, and your API provides access to the resources in your environment, so this gateway is an intermediary between you and third parties. It's also the interface between your internal applications. For example, if you have a mobile app and internet banking, they can all be copied in the same API through that gateway. So, that was basically the use cases we have. So, we have almost all the API's behind the gateway.

I like API Management's sandbox feature. It's an environment where you can test out the API before putting it into production and connecting it to a live environment.

The hybrid part could be improved because API Management is entirely cloud-based, but some of our resources are on-prem, so formatting is an issue. Our goal is dual implementation. 

There's always room for improvement in terms of the user interface. Generally speaking, technology evolves, so any service provider needs to make their product as user-friendly as possible. In the next couple of years, we'll see more non-tech people handling tech solutions. The solution should be more accessible, so people can use it to create things without being very tech-savvy.

We've been using Azure API Management for about three years.

API Management is stable.

API Management is scalable. The licensing is structured so that you save more at a higher scale. The only limit to the scale is how much you're willing to pay. 

We have an enterprise support contract for Microsoft, and we don't have problems with them. 

We used IBM ESB before Azure API Management, and we're using both now. ESB isn't the same as API Management from a technology perspective. They have distinct functions, but they can do similar things. You can view an API on IBM ESB, but you can view and expose API on Azure API Management. They solve similar problems but are not exactly the same.

Deploying API Management is somewhat tricky depending on your level of technical knowledge. The first time we used it in production, we had it for a couple of months. The first month was an evaluation period, so we had it in a test environment to get a feel for how it works and possible complications. However, you could deploy it in a couple of weeks if you wanted. 

You only need about two to manage it, including one admin. It's more like a platform-as-a-service, so we don't need to do the normal maintenance we do on an on-prem platform. 

We deployed API Management in-house.

I can't disclose how much we pay monthly, but the pricing for Azure API Management is available online. It's pay as you go. The subscription packages have room for different scales. It's calculated by the number of apps or computers you use. You do not have to use the enterprise subscription. These subscriptions have different pricing, so you can find one to meet your needs for scalability.

I rate Azure API Management nine out of 10. Your choice of technology is based on your needs, budget, and C suite. Azure API Management is a good product, but there are some other good services, like Azure Connect, Google APG, and a couple of others. It depends on your needs.

Using a cloud solution has advantages because the client can immediately use the product. Another strong reason we use Azure API Management is that we heavily use Microsoft products in our organization, so Azure is a natural choice.

I am an end user of Microsoft Azure API Management. We integrate Azure API Management in our IT infrastructure as we already have an Azure cloud. API is already readily integratable in Azure because Azure is a cloud platform, and API Management comes with it. Our applications are in Azure cloud.

Azure API Management's service monitoring is not as good as an independent product used for service monitoring. There are dedicated products for service monitoring, so we prefer those dedicated products because the inbuilt capabilities are not exhaustive or comprehensive.

The simplicity to learn and apply using API Management is valuable. Another advantage is the ease of integration with Azure.

Expansion to global regions is a point for improvement, as licensing is costly. A new installation in a different region requests a new subscription. For test management, preproduction management, and production, all require separate subscriptions, resulting in higher costs. 

Additionally, only the premium subscription allows for private IPs. Even for lower environments like test environments, a premium subscription is required, which is limiting.

I have been using the solution for close to two years.

I rate the stability eight out of ten.

I rate scalability seven out of ten.

I rate their technical support eight out of ten.

Positive

We previously used Kong. Our organization chose Azure as the cloud platform for its applications, preferring products that come from Microsoft and are already available on Azure, so we switched to Microsoft Azure API Management.

Initial installation would take only a few hours. Setting up the entire environment took about two to three working days.

Initially, it appeared to be a low-cost solution, but the need for separate subscriptions for every environment and sometimes a high-end subscription for lower environments has increased the cost significantly. The solution seemed cheap initially. However, it ended up being more expensive than expected.

I would recommend Microsoft Azure API Management to others. It's cost-effective for medium to small-scale organizations that do not need a global presence. However, larger global organizations might find better alternatives.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

I have been using Microsoft Azure API Management as a consultant, primarily recommending it for enterprises.

The solution helps in securing AI projects by providing governance and control through API management.

The most valuable feature is its role as a linchpin in AI Hub architecture, enhancing data handling.

The pricing model needs improvement, as some enterprise features are expensive.

I have been dealing with Microsoft Azure API Management for a few years.

Generally, I am satisfied with the performance, scalability, and technical support.

The performance and scalability of the solution are good.

The technical support quality could be better, although the issue is not significant.

Positive

I did not work with anything similar before Microsoft API Management.

I did not face any issues during the initial setup.

I did not face any challenges with the implementation.

Some of the enterprise features are quite expensive. A better pricing model is needed.

I recommend considering Kong if Microsoft API Management does not fit the budget.

I would recommend Microsoft Azure API Management to those on the Microsoft platform. If not on Azure, consider looking into Kong.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We have a couple of use cases for this  product. It's fully cloud-native and can handle telco distribution for end-to-end distribution management. Five or six years ago, we made a  fantastic product with microservices. I was responsible for rolling it out for a large telco in Qatar. They had no distribution or end-to-end visibility or platform. So we helped them to move to a cloud platform for their entire distribution and operation. The beauty of that product is when you look at the telco distribution standpoint your maybe five or ten thousand merchant ecosystem will be connected to that platform. It helps with generating several transactions in a minute or second. And it gives that kind of scalability in the back end. 

The other use case was for banking transactions. If you have your core banking platform that is legacy, if a user wants to bring in a lot of additional alternatives, they need to have some kind of a platform for enhancements. We made a cloud to bring some kind of their operations to the cloud. We made a transaction platform for them so that their merchants could access transactions.

The API management is very good. You have sophisticated dashboards that help you to understand what's really going on - in addition to whatever security layer that you can bring on top of that. It is easy to manage front and backend APIs.

You can put on your own security layer so that you know only the authorized people are accessing your back-end systems through the gateway. In addition to that, you have sophisticated dashboards and reporting for storage logs or logging. That is quite useful, specifically in the banking sector. 

You can limit items by parameters such as geography or private VPMs. 

You have different pricing tiers and pricing is based depending on the traffic. You can go to basic pricing if you like. Depending on your traffic, you have licensing options.

Microsoft manages everything so you can focus on building applications and deploying them.

The platform components are quite interesting. 

I'm not sure if there are certain areas needed for improvement. I haven't explored its shortcomings. So far, the requirements have been met.

Maybe the customization could be a bit better. 

My team found difficulty in migrating APIs from one platform to this platform. We could export and import properly. We made a complete API for a UAT environment, and when we moved the APIs, we ran into issues. 

They don't have a standard local IP. They only have a public IP.

I've used the solution for six to eight years or so. 

I'd rate the stability eight out of ten. It is stable and reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

The solution scales well. I'd rate it ten out of ten. It's easy to expand as needed. 

We have both medium-sized and enterprise-level customers. 

Technical support has been fine. We are happy with their level of support. 

Positive

I have worked with other competing products, such as Apigee and AWS.

The initial setup is very straightforward and simple. I'd rate the ease of deployment eight out of ten.

The provisioning takes a couple of minutes. Then you need to do some programming. 

The pricing is reasonable. I'd rate the cost in terms of affordability seven out of ten. 

The premium tier is too expensive for medium-sized organizations. However, the local IP only is offered at the premium tier. 

I did not compare this solution to others since I was promoting Microsoft at the time. 

I'm not sure which version of the solution we're using. 

People should explore API management. You do get full control of your API, and from a security standpoint, you have a good understanding of the touchpoints and far more control of your traffic. You know who is accessing your services. Even if a company has legacy systems, it should have an API gateway in front of its legacy systems.

We went with Microsoft since we were Microsoft partners.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. 

I like API Management's ability to do hybrid cloud stuff.

Some of the DevOps stuff could be easier to work with. The migration paths are a little complicated, and moving code around could be more seamless. There should be less manual migration when several teams work together to publish code to the DevOps. 

For example, if you and I are working on the same application, and there are conflicts, you should be able to resolve those conflicts more easily. It shows you the conflicts, and you have to fix them yourself. Better conflict resolution with software migration is what I recommend.

I've been working with Azure API Management for maybe five years in total.

Azure API Management is relatively stable.

Azure is a pay-as-you-go model. You build out your virtual environment and pay a monthly price depending on CPU cores, storage, etc.

I rate Azure API Management nine out of 10. I prefer Microsoft products to the others out there because Microsoft has always catered to software developers as opposed to Amazon or Google, which do a lot of other things. Microsoft has always had the best development toolsets, and it's better for application developers.

I work with an enterprise and they needed to manage lots of APIs. They needed to manage information and they use this product to meet their needs.

The policies on offer are the most valuable aspect of the solution. 

The solution is reliable and very stable. 

I don't really have anything in mind at the moment in terms of areas of improvement. It does what we need it to do for the most part.

Technical support could be more helpful and responsive. They are quite slow. 

The documentation around the solution is lacking. Users will need to do a lot of digging and googling in order to get the answers they need. 

The premium version is very expensive. 

I've been using the solution for about two years now. It hasn't been too long at this point. 

The solution was stable. We didn't have issues with bugs or glitches. It didn't crash or freeze. it was pretty reliable and the performance was pretty good. 

Technical support was a bit slow, actually. We did engage technical support once or twice and it took quite a bit of time for them to come back to us. By the time they'd come back, we'd kind of solved the problem ourselves. They weren't overly helpful.

I'm just a developer, so I didn't really get involved in the pricing. Therefore, I can't speak to the exact costs of the agreements involved in terms of licensing. That said, I do know that we used the developer license just to try things out. My understanding is that the premium version is quite expensive.

I'm a customer and an end-user. My company does not have a special business relationship with Microsoft.

I'd rate the solution at a seven out of ten.

While technical support and documentation are lacking, I would still recommend the product to others. 

It is easy to use. 

They need to work on the third party integrations. 

I have experience with Microsoft Azure API Management. 

The technical support team is good. 

Positive

The initial setup is straightforward. 

Microsoft is competitively priced. 

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