WSO2 API Manager Reviews

The principal things we use WSO2 API Manager for are to convert SOAP to Rest services, add security, and to provide more function for the administrators and to the developers. These are the main items.

We now work with two versions which are in a test environment. We are using version 3.0 and version 3.2. It's very possible that the version that we will use in production will be 3.2.

We can use WSO2 API Manager at IaaS and PaaS enviroments.

 WSO2 is very easy to install. It has all the main functionalities that we looking for when we want to put up the management solution like a friendly UI tool, soap to rest API publication options, plugin extensions, add oatuh 2.0 to the operations,  install on premise, hablde multiple versions of the same api, import and export swagger. 

In terms of what can be improved, we are doing a proof of concept and we found some problems with the migration process from the last version to the 3.2. We have problems with the migration of the tenants.

I have been using WSO2 API Manager for about one and a half years.

In terms of stability, we are testing it in the test environment now so I don't have information about this. Maybe in the future we will know better.

In terms of scalability, it has several main components and it is easy to make different strategies with each one. For example, we can deploy one component in high availability and you can use a different strategy with others components of the tool.

We now have around 10 people using it because we are working in the test environment. In the future, we expect different organizations use it too.

For now, we want to put a community version in production, test it, and then analize if it is an option to switch to commercial. 

In terms of the technical support, we don't use it. But I would evaluate documentation manuals as very good.

We made POCs with ApiConnect, and 3scale.

For example, 3scale has a very good user interface but it's doesnt has the functionalities that we need. ApiConnect is similar to the WSO2 but it's more expensive. WSO2 API Manager is easier to start with.

The initial setup is very easy.

I did not do the deployment myself but I think that it took around one or two hours. No more than this. This is because we need a different database. We needed to change something in the default, but otherwise it was very easy.

We contracted an external worker that did these things on the monitor.

 We are happy with the tool. Now, we need to do more test. We started one and a half years ago, or more and now, we can solve the evolution of the two different versions.

Improve the possibility to migrate to different versions would be very good. It would also be good for integration withdifferents identity server to have more possibilities with other tools. 

On a scale of one to ten I would rate WSO2 API Manager an 8 because I think that the evolution of the product has a lot of differences between near versions. I would like it to be a more stable solution. 

We provide this solution to our customers. Most of our clients are enterprise size organizations. We have a partnership with the company and I'm a solutions architect. 

This is a complete integration suite and it's good for open banking and the like. From a product perspective, it's a good platform. 

We've had some challenges with the professional support and licensing aspects of WSO. 

We've been using this solution for six years. 

Stability is definitely something that needs to be improved. 

Customer support could be improved. 

Neutral

I think our deployment process is good but our interactions with WSO could be improved. 

The licensing process could be improved, it's been a challenge for us.

The traction we've seen with API Manager over the last couple of years has dropped off and solutions like Kong have become more popular. Our focus has now shifted to that product. 

I'd rate everything about this solution an eight out of 10. 

The solution is used mainly for API management. 

The main feature is the enterprise integrator. It's very important to API management. You can implement SOA strategy in the company using the API Manager. Some companies were just using enterprise integrators at the beginning. For implementers, they had to install it to use the API management and identity the server to have more security in the system.

The solution is stable. 

It's scalable. 

It is easy to set up. 

They've already improved a lot of features between versions six and seven.

The user interface could be a bit better. Sometimes you have different visual aspects when you change from one screen to another.

I'm implementing a WSO2 project right now. I've used the solution for the last six months. 

It is a reliable, stable solution. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

You can scale the product. 

We can install it in a cluster manner. We can use Docker to scale all of the systems. 

We have 1,000 users on the solution. 

We had support every time we needed it; we could reach support without a problem.

Positive

The initial setup is not complex. You can install everything together in what they call an all-in-one setup, or you can install each model separately. It's not difficult to install.

If I had to rate the initial setup of WSO from one to five, I'd rate it a four out of five.

I don't deal with the licensing aspect of the product.

I'm starting with Microsoft as our API manager on a daily basis.

I'm working as a project manager and architect, so I don't install the products. However, I understand their texture and how the parts interact with each other.

I'd advise new users to have a company that knows it very, very well. If you don't don't know the product at the beginning, you can make a mess of your project. Choose a good partner first to make everything easier.

I would rate the solution eight out of ten. It's a good product.

We are a banking solution and use WSO2 to offer our services to banks.

WSO2 helps to expose our internal APIs to the outside world.

We had some problems with the reverse proxy not being able to invoke fully qualified domain names, so we have to build some custom scripts to solve this issue. In the next release, WSO2 should make multifactor authentication simpler.

I've been using WSO2 API Manager for two years.

WSO2 is very stable.

WSO2's scalability is very good because we deployed using a microgateway-driven approach on OCP, which takes care of scaling. I would rate its scalability as 4.5 out of five.

WSO2's technical support is good.

Positive

I previously used IBM App Connect but switched to WSO2 for a number of reasons, including cost, complexity, technical resource availability, troubleshooting, and multiple practice.

The pattern we followed to set up WSO2 was a bit complex, but the end goal was very clear, so the setup itself was straightforward and took about two days. I would rate the setup experience as four out of five.

We used a third-party team.

I would advise anybody thinking of implementing WSO2 to go for it. I would give WSO2 a rating of eight out of ten.

We use WSO2 API Manager to manage APIs.

WSO2 API Manager's most valuable features are the simple interface that is easy to use and the APIs lifecycle.

WSO2 API Manager could improve the API approval system.

I have been using WSO2 API Manager for approximately one year.

The stability of the WSO2 API Manager is good.

We have used the open-source version, but I'm we have now switched to the enterprise version, I am not of the differences. The rate-limiting in the open-source seems not to work. When I add buy limits, it does not work correctly. I do not think this issue is in the enterprise version.

This solution is suitable for medium to large businesses.

The technical support from the WSO2 API Manager is very good. When there is an issue they fix the ticket very quickly.

I have not used other API management systems.

The initial setup of WSO2 API Manager is simple.

WSO2 API Manager is a low-cost solution. It is one of the most affordable solutions. 

I find the solution to be good overall. The solution is receiving a lot of attention and is attracting investors.

I rate WSO2 API Manager a seven out of ten.

We're currently evaluating WSO2 API Manager and Kong for development environments and not production environments. We're currently using Apigee and AWS API Database for the production environments. 

Its open-source features are very good, especially for your production work. If your workload's still running in an on-premises environment, WSO2 is a good product.

I like a few WSO2 plugins we're using for routing, message request transformation, or response transformation. I also like the security encryption feature.

Another thing I like about WSO2 is the nice training and tutorials they have on their website. They have my type of training on their website for API gateway and open banking. They're all self-based training, and you can go to those training pages or videos and learn in your free time.

They don't have different URLs for administrators. They should have one in place like Kong. For example, Kong has Konga as an administrative URL, where everything is available in one place for submissions and subscribers. But with WSO2, they have exposed it on a different port, and if I want to publish, I have to open a different URL with a different port for publishers and subscribers. It'll help if they can combine it on one port. WSO2 API Manager could also be somewhat cheaper.

I have been using WSO2 API Manager for more than one or two months.

It looks like a stable product.

WSO2 API Manager is a scalable solution.

WSO2 is the first open-source solution we're trying out. But we're still using Apigee from Google and AWS API Database from Amazon.

The initial setup is straightforward, and not much effort is required for installation. It's simple.

We implemented it by ourselves. It took about two people to set up and deploy.

It's not expensive, but it could be cheaper.

I would recommend it as I think it is good.  

On a scale from one to ten, I would give WSO2 API Manager an eight.

We use it along with IdentityServer, as our main API management tool for API exposure to the internet. It's not for internal usage, it's for external use.

We have two main roles regarding WSO2 API Manager. There are the admins, who publish guides and user updates, etc — we employ around four people who perform this role. In terms of users, we have around five to six million users going through it on a monthly basis.

The main feature — the publication of the API, the management section — is great in general.

I think it would be very unfair for me to answer this question because we are running a very outdated system (they might have improved it a lot with their newer versions), but I'm going to try it anyway. I think they could greatly improve the general UX with their solutions because when you manage different components that are meant to work together, it's very difficult. You have to deal with two completely unrelated interfaces.

Perhaps they should include a tool to assist with migrating to Azure.

I have been using WSO2 API Manager for the past four to five years.

Stability-wise, it's actually pretty nice — it's good. I wouldn't say it's very good or excellent, but it's good. It fits the bill.

Scalability-wise, I'd give it a three-star rating out of five — good, but not very good or perfect.

The provisioning has to be done manually. In terms of system-wise configurations, these settings involve a lot of big Java components, so it's not natural. It's not very easy to handle. Again, this is an older version. Perhaps they have already worked on this.

We don't have a contract for dedicated support. We have to deal with internet forums, etc. Officially speaking, there's no support outside of community forums.

The documentation and community support are pretty helpful. There are a lot of questions answered about WSO2 on several forums and message boards, etc. Although it's not dedicated, it's quite relevant.

We're actually in the process of switching to Microsoft Azure API management.

For us, the main benefit of Azure is that it's a managed solution. We have a very restricted theme and not having to deal with the actual configuration of the platform or the underlying operating system and other intrinsic administration tasks is a big win for us. The feature that we use the most and that is most licensed is perhaps the online portal. The certified online portal is the biggest win for us because we can deal with the associated integrations within this new portal, which we can't in the current stack, the on-premises stack.

I wasn't a part of the original project, but I know that the initial setup wasn't easy.

We use the open-source version — the free version.

I wouldn't actually recommend this to anyone. I think that there are paid solutions, such as Azure API Management, which will relieve you from the administrative burden. Personally, I wouldn't recommend this solution at all.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give WSO2 a rating of seven. It's a good tool, but dealing with the on-premises infrastructure is a big headache.

It is basically used for the integration of applications inside the organization and also for business partners outside the organization.

API management lifecycle is the most valuable.

I would like it to be a more convenient development platform with the ability to write orchestrations and so on.

Our problem with this product is that in my country, we are the only enterprise that has been using this product. We're missing a lot of knowledge from colleagues to consult with, and we also aren't able to recruit people with relevant skills. It is a big problem. The small team that is maintaining this product is the only team that can actually relate to any technical issue. The support that we're getting from the company is not great. There is also a cultural gap there because they're from Sri Lanka, and it is not easy. They're putting in a lot of effort, but they are not meeting our expectations.

I have been using this solution for three years. I have used it in production for two years.

It is stable.

It is scalable. We have a few dozen users.

The support that we're getting from the company is not great.

It was pretty straightforward. The deployment took a couple of weeks.

We had a reseller who is not an integrator. So, we basically did everything in-house.

We only did it in a very superficial way. We didn't really evaluate.

I would say if you're looking for a simple and straightforward solution, it is probably a good idea, but if you're looking for a more advanced option, then you should go for some other solution.

I would rate WSO2 API Manager a seven out of ten.