Microsoft Azure API Management Reviews

There were legacy APIs running on-premises, and we wanted a modernized layer without disturbing the existing legacy layer. Microsoft Azure API management helps with that. We can wrap the modernized API layer. The modernized API layer can perform rate-limiting, monitoring, throttling, aggregating, and other boilerplate functions without disturbing the backend business logic.

I like that security features can be integrated with API Management. I also like that you can perform rate-limiting and throttling functions.

You can host multiple API gateways in different locations. If one goes down, then another will take over. Microsoft Azure API Management is good in terms of nonfunctional requirements.

The documentation is neat and organized, and as a result, we rarely have the need to contact technical support. 

Microsoft Azure API Management is lagging behind Apigee and should also have a better CICD process.

I used it for six months.

It's a stable solution.

Because it is on Microsoft Azure, we don't have to worry about scalability. I would give scalability a rating of ten out of ten.

Technical support is very poor and needs a lot of improvement. The process is not straightforward, and they are hard to reach.

Because it is a cloud solution, the initial setup is straightforward.

It is an expensive solution, but any API solution will be expensive.

Overall, I would rate Microsoft Azure API Management at nine on a scale from one to ten.

The main use case is if you want to be exposed to an external endpoint. We use it for access. It can only be used by Azure API.

If I want to expose API endpoints to clients, we use this solution. 

The API management is great. It comes out of the box ready to go and comes with policies. 

It is stable.

Technical support is good.

We have witnessed an ROI.

We have to put the logs in Datadog. We need to use some other product to do all of the things we want. That costs extra. However, there are other solutions, like Dynatrace, that offer more features and have more functionalities. Right now, we have to use logic apps. You need more third-party apps to fill in the gaps. 

If I want to connect to other apps to Saleforce or Snowflake, et cetera, I need a quicker way to do mapping and to integrate everything together. 

I need to have microservice access. 

I'd like to have better flexibility and more capabilities. 

I've been using the solution for three to four years. 

I'd rate the stability seven or eight out of ten. It's reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. 

We do not scale the solution. We don't need multi-tenancy or anything like that. Our understanding is that if we did need to scale it would cost more. 

Technical support is very good and is available around the clock. 

Positive

I'm familiar with a variety of other solutions, including Mulesoft.

I have witnessed an ROI while using the solution. 

The pricing is expensive, however, it does offer great value. I'd rate the solution seven or eight out of ten in terms of value for money.

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

The product covers all of the basic needs you will need. If you need more robust options, Mulesoft might be a good option. However, this is a pretty good tool

I'd rate the solution an eight out of ten.

Our company uses the solution for API orchestration and UI management. We currently have 50,000 users. 

The UI management is very easy to use. 

The solution provides good management of API orchestrations. 

Technical support is very good and moves very fast. 

The API gateway can be very complex. We had difficulty managing end users for a very, very complex project. 

I am not sure that another API gateway would have better handled this difficult project. 

I have been using the solution for four years. 

The solution is stable. 

The solution is scalable. 

We have a partnership with Microsoft. Their support is very good and moves very fast. They are available to us in a maximum of ten to twenty minutes. 

The setup is very easy and doesn't take long. 

We implemented the solution in-house. 

I also use WSO2 and Kong. Of all the options, Kong is my preference because it is easier to use. 

The solution's support is very good. 

I rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

We use Microsoft Azure API Management with our coding.

All we need to do is run our specific code because the dependencies are already there. 

I would like to see more security features become available. For example, the integration on premises could be better. Things could be more user-friendly. Currently, the integration we work with is more complex than it needs to be.

I have been using Microsoft Azure API Management for the past thirteen months.

I am finding Microsoft Azure API Management stable.

Day by day we are increasing the usage of Microsoft Azure API Management.

My current experience with technical support has been good.

We were using DIS. We needed to install the run times, libraries, and install operating systems. We had to make a lot of initial preparations to get the process ready to operate. Now it is already available and ready to operate with Microsoft Azure API Management.

I would rate the initial setup process a four out of five.  The setup was basic and good.

We do our implementation through one of our partners. The configuration was around fifteen to twenty minutes long.

There is no investment funding or upfront cost needed. 

There are no licensing fees we pay on a monthly basis.

We compared it with DIS because most of the time we were using DIS, for such kind of deployment.

Many people are using the API, and it is a prominent feature currently being used. I would rate Microsoft Azure API Management an eight out of ten.

We use the solution for API management. 

The tool's most valuable feature is the integration of CI/CD with the API gateway. 

Microsoft Azure API Management needs to improve stability. 

Microsoft Azure API Management is stable; I rate it an eight out of ten. 

I rate the product's scalability a six to seven out of ten. 

The cloud-based version is not difficult to deploy. Microsoft Azure API Management's deployment depends on the API numbers customers want to onboard. It takes around four to six months. 

I rate Microsoft Azure API Management an eight out of ten. 

Microsoft Azure API Management provides customers with customized solutions for various use cases and situations, allowing them to deploy their API strategy and products while also managing and protecting APIs.

It provides solutions for architecting, deploying, and monitoring APIs with other Azure services. 

Users can manage their complete API lifespan using Azure API Management.

The most valuable feature of Microsoft Azure API Management is monitoring.

When compared with Apigee, I prefer Microsoft Azure API Management.

When comparing the API Gateway of Microsoft Azure API Management with those of Apigee and Vital Mikram, which are other API management solutions, I prefer, Vital Mikram, the others are similar.

I would like to see more integration with other platforms, as well as increased security.

I have been working with Microsoft Azure API Management for ten years.

Azure has both a certificate and a level certification.

Microsoft Azure API Management is stable.

Microsoft Azure API Management is a scalable solution.

We have ten users in our organization.

We have a team of five to ten technicians to maintain this solution per unit.

Technical support is good.

The initial setup is straightforward.

It was deployed very quickly.

We deployed it ourselves. It was done in-house.

The price is comparable.

In my opinion, it is similar to Apigee.

I would rate Microsoft Azure API Management a seven out of ten.

The basic tier is pretty good. 

It's publicly available API Management.

The price is pretty reasonable for us. 

We need better integration with VNet. 

It would be nice to not only configure it through the interface but also with an ARM template or something like that. Maybe it's possible, but it's not that easy to find.

It took us time to get used to the interface. Now that we run it, it's a little bit hard to have a testing environment and the production environment and keep it synced. If you can do that through a script, that would be far easier. However, there was a time thing on our side. We couldn't get it done, and in the end, we just set it up manually.

The licensing tiers can be misleading. 

It would be ideal if there was a way to add monetization into the mix so that we could more easily sell our APIs.

I started using the solution about three years ago, and I use it now and again on a few projects. 

We didn't have a previous solution.

I wasn't directly involved with the implementation, and I'm not sure how long it took to deploy the product. 

Some of my colleagues implemented the solution. We did it ourselves using the documentation provided by Microsoft. 

We are using a basic tier. 

For the things we do, it's reasonable in terms of cost. You can implement it in the developer solutions. That's basically more or less free. But if you implement VNET in it there, you can only upgrade it if you use premium, and premium is so expensive. That's just no fun. That was a little bit annoying since you think you have a good solution in your development environment, and then you are in production and need a premium tier to have the same configuration. We had to reconfigure some stuff.

We also looked at Apigee, and Apigee has some integrated features, however, Apigee was very complex to get started with. Apart from that, we are a Microsoft company, and we're on the Microsoft stack. It was more logical to keep everything in Azure. That's why we chose Azure API Management.

We use Azure and it suits our case pretty well. It could be better, but we might also have to learn more. Currently, I would rate it at an eight out of ten for our use case. We might also want to use it in the future to sell subscriptions, which is not possible out of the box. You can configure subscriptions, yet you still have to do the whole selling and measuring and things like that. That's not fully integrated.

I use API Management for all of our AKS clusters.

API Management's price could be lower.

I've been using API Management for a year.

API Management is stable.

API Management is scalable based on the load.

API Management does not take long to deploy.

We used an in-house team.

I would rate API Management nine out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for storage. It’s for a database backup.

We really like the scalability.

It’s easy to set up.

The cloud deployment performance could be better.

Technical support could use some improvement.

I’ve been using the solution for three years.

It is stable. However, its performance is not better than an on-premises deployment.

The solution can scale and is easy to expand. It’s actually quite impressive.

We have about ten clients using the solution.

Technical support could be better. There’s a lot of bouncing around. It’s not orderly.

It is a straightforward setup. The implementation is not difficult or complex. The deployment is quick as well. It only took two or three days to get everything up and running.

We have about five technical people who can handle the setup and implementation process.

We are a Microsoft-managed partner, so we do have some pricing from the distributor.

The licensing is dynamic as it is based on cloud usage.

I can recommend Azure Block Storage to other people. However, they need to have an open mind in order to use cloud storage.

I’d rate the solution an eight out of ten.

We have been using this solution to protect our APIs and to decouple our APIs between the host versus the outside world. It operates as a gateway pattern in front of the APIs.

We use this solution for API rate limiting and for its security features against DDoS.

The scalability of this solution could be improved. The volume which the API Management task service can handle needs to be improved. Cost wise, this solution could be optimized.

This is a stable solution.

This is not a scalable solution. 

The customer service and support for this solution is average. They have not been able to provide a solution to some of the challenges we have faced. 

Neutral

The initial setup is not complex as this is a PaaS-based solution.

This is an expensive solution. 

I would advise others to evaluate their volumes, nonfunctional requirements, and just check whether the NFR performance metrics of API Management has been met. Otherwise, better take a trade-off between, because we have gone through the hard path, tried everything using it, and then we have moved from API Management to Apigee.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.