WSO2 API Manager Reviews

We use API Manager to publish our microservice for the public. We also use it because of its integrated functionality. We are researching many kinds of functions with WSO2, not only WSO2 management.

The most interesting feature is its Mac-based function. We want to use the API Manager to unify our microservice and then publish the service outside. In the future we want to combine it with our service. But we haven't implemented it for other Mac-based work, yet. This is an interesting element.

WSO2 API Manager is a little complex to use. I think the user interface could be improved. 

Additionally, the installation setup is a little complex. I think in future versions I would like to see some improvements in the system's installation.

I have been using WSO2 API Manager for about half a year.

We deployed directly to the API Manager, and when we tested the performance we got a memory error. I don't know where or how to solve it. Maybe the memory size, or other setup parameters can solve this problem. I'm not sure whether it's an issue of stability, but it's an issue. We think this problem can be solved by many methods. Fundamentally, the problem is a general memory problem, not necessarily a WSO2 API Manager problem.

We are discussing use keys in our organization. Maybe some end user will come for testing and we can fully deploy the API Manager to be used every day.

API Manager is not easy to scale because some of its components lack scalability. It's a difficult point. Especially because companies are so cloud-based these days, microservice scalability is a major thing.

We have only contacted support two times.

We did discuss several different options but we liked WSO2 API Manager because it is an open source system. So we think it's better for our current needs.

The initial setup is not easy. There are many different components which need to be coordinated. The way that you receive the public's message interface is very complex.

Initial setup took two or three weeks the first time. It's not a perfect system or setup.

We had two people working on the installation but not full time.

We installed the system by ourselves.

I recommend this product. I think WSO2 API Manager is good. I'd like to recommend the system to others.

On a scale of one to ten I would rate WSO2 API Manager an eight.

Our primary use for this solution is to manage API, which is important to our business model and design of what we do as consultants. I found WSO2 (Web Services Oxygen Tank) was a platform that I could easily work on. All the building practices have to do with API, so when I needed a platform that could manage our API with flexibility, this was our best opportunity. It also leaves room for growth as a solution.

The product has improved our organization by simply allowing us to do things now in ways we could not do before we started using it. In the future, it will also allow us to offer expanded options to our clients.

I don't know that there is one single valuable feature. We chose the solution because it could integrate and solve multiple issues. Building blocks and all the products we need to integrate can be attached. That capability in the architecture makes it very flexible. Control is possible over even little things like that fact that I can enable and disable the logs.

The logs are well detailed and if I'm troubleshooting, it makes troubleshooting quite easier. I can test the loads and see every detail, their inquires, and their response. I think the recent changes in the WSO2 also make orchestration better. That is designing and orchestrating components is quite easy. For me, the fact that it's built upon TomCat makes everything easier for me. These are all very valuable features.

It is a very good product, but still, there are some things I think can be improved. I think the interface is the one that comes to mind first. The interface should be much more user-friendly and modern.

If you look at other products and their modern user interfaces, you could see what the other companies are doing and what you could be doing. A nice look and feel is something that can impress a user, and it can be trendy and inviting. I think the user interface for now for the WSO2 is not really there yet. The one complaint I get from our business team is the same: they find it not that user-friendly and this makes it more difficult for them to use. It takes some experience to get around.

Another feature which I love but can also be improved is usability in terms of switching across the different components of the product. You could have just the user management console and some adjustment in design would make us have less trouble navigating. But the components are all separate. You have to access the publisher console, and then they have a flash publisher. Then you have the store, and more. It is just many things you have to know.

So there are different interfaces. I would love a situation where you should be able to just have a single interface where you're executing your role per security. Depending on the role you have, will determine what you can do. I don't have to switch across different interfaces before I could access the publisher using the same roles if I am assigned the privilege.

Lastly, another feature I think is needed is in the area of customization. Before you can make any custom changes, you have to be very technical. But it's a bit difficult to make changes depending on what you need to accomplish. The documentation is also not that straight forward and could use work.

You have to make a whole lot of changes to the framework. It's a framework, which I think is something that can be more efficient. It's not the common framework that you see in today's development as we have in other products. It is a custom framework that we use for the product.

I think for now that really all of the problems are summarized by the interface. They need to invest more on the front end. I know sometimes people will want to work as a back-end guy and that should remain. I think they should invest more on the user interface, user experience to make it better for less technical people.

I would rate the stability good because the building block that we used was TomCat and I know TomCat. For me, it is very simple work with and very stable.

As far as scalability, we always use the products on a high demand development because I know the initial communications that I've experienced for myself with TomCat. Because I worked with TomCat for a number of years and I know that TomCat has a maximum capacity. But I didn't know how WS02 manages and used the ability of all its feature pool, so I won't be able to give a comment on that. But this is something we will explore more in our next development project. There is one new project that we have that is going to require a very high demand environment.

We design applications to appease the capabilities of the environment and the client. We pick up on stability by evaluating data transactions per second. So if I get to use the API in more of the client environments and with different configurations then I would know more. But I don't think we have even yet pushed it to its potential.

I have not had to contact technical support as essentially I am technical support. So far, everything is good and I haven't had any reason to contact them.

The initial setup for a technical person like myself is not difficult. Once you download the installation, all you do is start from the dependencies, which is from the JAVA and the database. I think for me, the setup is pretty straightforward and will be for other technical people.

We do all of our own installations and installations for our clients as well.

WS02 is really the first API manager I have used, or I have used API management but not with this kind of flexibility. In terms of know-how and getting to know about the API Manager, we currently only use it only internally. We do some consulting, and so we tried other solutions to solve other problems for them and ourselves. We tried some telecommunications products, but they did not have an application that manages the API. We tried Apache Camel. Out of several different products, I was excited to see a similar application that would manage API as well. Several of the other products I found pretty easy to use, but that is not the main criteria. Maybe those products would be useful for consulting and what we offer clients. But this is the product that was best for the integrated solutions we needed.

Right now we are using only the main part of the product. It is an internal application only for deployment at our company at the moment. We haven't deployed the product across to clients for now because they will have to be very technical, and it is almost the nature of clients who use consultants that they may not always be the most technical or want to use difficult products.

The experience we are building internally is something we do look forward to sharing. We do have one client who is considering the product. They want to use it similar to how we do as a local API, and we intend to expose it as a possible solution in our business plan for them. We are open to having new clients use it in the near future.

The advice I have for any of the organizations or companies looking for an API manager is that they, first of all, verify the building block before selecting a product. For me it is Apache, and I know the amount of work that goes towards Apache, how much has to go into TomCat. If we take on clients with a similar need it would make support rather easy for us to provide for them and we can be very efficient.

Secondly, the product is an open-source community build-up. The WS02 organization is its own company providing support. I grew with the product from the time I started to develop with it until now. I've been able to see the changes and how it has evolved. I know in WS02 ESB, now its called Enterprise Integrations. It shows its a growing community, it shows that it has the potential to be a great community. We can work with it for a long time as well as incorporate solutions in the technology that is out there today.

The longevity and growth of the product can help people to trust and use the product.

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate it an eight. It is an eight and not a ten because of the interface. But it is an eight, which is a good rating because I haven't seen any other vendor that provides a similar platform. You can use the platform directly or you can operate on the platform using the exposed API. I think that makes an exciting API that you can make use of in many different ways. There is no competitor that has more connections or offers such a platform.

We use the integrator.

The solution helps me get my job done. It's a good product.

The product hasn’t been updated for some time. I wonder if it has reached the end of its life and is no longer being maintained.

I have been using the solution for more than four years.

I rate the tool’s stability a five out of ten. There hasn’t been an update for a long time.

We did not face difficulties while deploying the product. The tool can be deployed within a few minutes. The documentation is good. We haven't had any issues in maintaining the tool.

I am using the free version.

We are a B2B company. I am the CTO. I work on the solution alone. We use it for a small project. All the technologies we use are open source. I recommend the solution to others. Overall, I rate the tool a seven out of ten.

For basic operations, I do not see too many differences between the other vendors. They all have similar features such as analytics and cloud links. This solution is a little bit faster, easier to use, and has better integration than the other solutions I have experienced. Additionally, If you want to build a newer EDI code, you can transport this data, it is quite a usable product. 

The user interface provides all functionalities to configure and manage the product, however its usability, espacially for first-time users, is a little bit "rough" compared to the UI of other commercial API Managers

I have been using the solution for approximately seven months.

The solution is stable.

The customer service was not a problem. We had a quick question regarding the implementation of the certificate. They handled the inquiry very well and we received an answer.

I rate WSO2 API Manager a nine out of ten.

As far as I am aware this solution is the first API Publisher that allows you to create and publish API and to manage the API lifecycle. It is very simple to manage an API lifecycle in this platform. Another great feature is the API store. It has the built-in test features, that allows the API creator to document their API and then publish it. The developers can go to the store and see the API, see the documentation, and can try the features. This is great for developers to have an easy way to test the API before using it. These are the best features I have experienced.

I have been using the older version of the solution and they have made a lot of changes in the newer versions. I tried version 3.2 and it is easier to navigate the APIs and even to manage the API. From what I have experienced from the versions I have tried, they could improve on the multi-tenant environments to allow some kind of SSO single sign-on between tenant. This is one great way to improve this product.

I have been using the solution for approximately two years.

It is a stable solution. However, the main issue is, if you are working with the open-source version, sometimes depending on the version, you need to deal with some issues and bugs. Usually, they are working fine but their business model is if they release a version and they find bugs, they will release another version fairly quickly with the fix. This means, if you do not have a subscription, for example, you are using version 2.6 and it has bugs, you will need to correct the bug by yourself or you need to wait to the next release.

The customer service is helpful. If we have any kind of questions regarding improvements or bug fix. We can open a ticket for the direct support and be connected to the support team, it was great.

The installation is very straightforward because you have multiple ways to do the setup. For example, if you are trying it, you can just download the product and click on the setup script, and it will be load up with the MIMO configuration. In production environments, you can use something like Kubernetes and it is also easy to do the deployment. They have features to connect to external user stores. This is great too, you can choose any kind of database you need and the start-up is easy. Even if you want to develop on your computer, you could download a script. The setup has all the configurations and with one command you can run multiple products at the same time.

Deployment is simple all you do is download the solution, click, and it is up and running. For production deployments, you will need less than a day for a simple setup working with Docker or something similar. If you are going to use Kubernetes, I think it mainly depends on your know-how on how to use Kubernetes itself. This solution is a very quick setup, there are not too many things to deal with.

There is a subscription-based pricing structure and also the open-sourced version available.

You have two options to choose when deciding what type of version you want to go with, the open-source or the subscription version. In a production environment, it is best to go with the subscription to make sure all the bugs are fixed.

I recommend this solution to others.

I rate WSO2 API Manager a nine out of ten.

One of the main use cases for our organization is that we can use it as a digital integration hub. You can also use it as a base for a marketplace or open banking.

We are using it for the enablement of a digital service or digital integration hub. We are helping small customers to digitalize their services. We select the best of these services and solutions and trying to deploy them in our platform and expose them to several different clients.

The solution is open-source.

The main feature that I like the most is that it is a containerized solution. The API solution is fully containerized. It also has a micro-gateway.

You can scale the solution up and down easily. It's not a monolith. It's a containerized solution. It's an important and strong feature. It's fully flexible.

The solution has a stack and different products that fit well to my requirements, such as a micro-integrator, analytics, streaming integration, and identity access management.

I'm using the open-source version, therefore my comments are basically related to just the open-source version. I specify this, due to the fact that, if you have a subscription, you can have access to enterprise support. I need to work within the open-source community to get answers. When I deal with the stack overflow, it's a complex item that could easily be addressed by technical support, and yet, I don't have access to them on my current system. It would be helpful if the solution offered more communication about their technology and services. It would be useful for those of us on the open-source option.

Since the product is updated periodically there are lots of provisions. The documentation could be stronger and maybe the community support could be stronger. I don't have the luxury of turning to their in-house technical support to help me troubleshoot. I'm reliant on documentation and the community.

The stability is pretty good, but it could be improved.

It would be ideal, for our purposes, if the solution offered GraphQL support for the micro-gateway.

I haven't been using the solution for too long. It may be about six months at this point.

The stability is pretty good. I'd rate it at four out of five. We didn't encounter intermittent issues and as long as you tailer your architecture or deployment pattern according to your project requirements you will not have lots of issues.

The solution scales really well as it is containerized. You can easily add more containers and built it out as much as you need to, or take them away and scale down. It's very easy to accomplish.

We have about 20 people using the solution currently.

We don't have access to technical support as we are using the open-source version. We need to rely on documentation and the community to help us troubleshoot.

Before using this solution I used Apigee. I chose this product over Apigee due to the fact that I could start with an open-source version. It was an advantage. My preference was choosing open-source. 

I know that Apigee has stronger capabilities, however, I want everything going to open-source solutions. Also, this solution has other components such as the micro integrator, access management, and other capabilities that were appealing. You can easily integrate with the API manager as well. There were just a lot of up-sides to making the switch.

The solution is not complex to implement. It's straight forward. You have access to charts and you have templates for different deployment patterns that you can follw. It's very easy to deploy. 

You can really tailor your installation, depending on your own requirements. The complexity comes from the project being deployed and not the product itself. In our case, we don't have any complexity, and therefore it was easy to install and deploy.

If you are just using a template, you can deploy the solution in less than one hour. After that, you need customization and configuration to happen. That will take some time. The running version of this software was almost one week for our scenario. Then for the API manager to do their work, I can say it will take less than one week.

You only need about three senior developers for maintenance purposes. Currently, we are working with one architect and two engineers for maintenance activities.

I handled the implementation myself. I didn't need the assistance of a consultant or integrator.

If you are using open-source, it's not expensive. If you choose to upgrade to get enterprise support, then you need a subscription and it has a cost. I am not using the enterprise support and I don't have a subscription. Therefore, I'm not technically paying for the product at all.

We're just customers. We don't have a business relationship with the company.

I'm currently using the open-source version of the solution. We're evaluating 3.2.0.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate it at an eight. If it offered better stability and more documentation, I'd rate it a bit higher.

The user experience is what is most valuable to me.

It's very scalable, which is one of the best features.

Integration is an area that needs to be improved.

In the next release, I would like to see a suite of applications, from other providers. They have many features that should be integrated to be a part of the WSO2 API Manager.

I have been working with this solution for one year.

This is a stable solution.

This is a very scalable application.

We have approximately 100 users in the organization.

I am satisfied with technical support.

Previously we were using in-house products.

The initial setup is straightforward, it's easy.

Deployment is complete within hours.

This is a good product and I recommend it.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

Security and management API.

Nothing, we only create pilot projects.

API compositions.

Support GPRS protocol.