We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"This is a very easy to use solution."
"It is easy to use and stable."
"It is quite stable. We've not had any problem. It has made for a good buy because we are finding that other companies that have similar set ups go down maybe once a month."
"The capabilities are very good."
"The technical support is good. Whenever we need anything, we have our IT team work with IBM to change whatever requirement is needed."
"It allows enterprises to expose some of their tech to outside stakeholders."
"The interface is very nice. It makes the solution easy to use and navigate."
"The most valuable features are stability and security."
"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."
"The scalability is endless."
"The design time setup has a lot of customizable fields, but we need certain standard fields to be added, such as what all of the consuming systems are. This needs to be very clearly articulated during the design time."
"It is expensive within this class of products."
"The automation and the simplicity could be improved."
"The solution would be better if it had cloud functionalities."
"I would like to see automation of the installation. If there could be a single-click function where you could automate everything, that would be helpful."
"The initial setup and installation could be easier."
"The developmental process is not quite user-friendly."
"I would like to see support for non-Java based services. We struggle a bit to be able to deploy and connect our .NET services because of things like data types. We had to map a couple of things. For one solution provider, we had to move them to .NET Core before we could use it properly. I would like to see more agnostic tool service platforms rather than moving it more towards Java or open source."
"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."
"More integration and usability with the cloud microservices would be nice"
"It is expensive when compared to other products in this class. There were no extra fees for add-ons or technical support."
"IBM API Connect could be cheaper."
"This is a licensed product. If your company is looking to obtain a license, you have to work with IBM partners."
"I haven't seen anyone go from on-premise to the cloud. In fact, I am seeing people go from the cloud to on-premise because the costs can quickly grow on the cloud."
"It should be cheaper. It has a yearly licensing."
"It's an expensive product."
"The pricing is too expensive with IBM. Sometimes, we prefer to go with an open source or something more lightweight."
"It would be a good idea to bring down the pricing by at least 20 to 30 percent."
"It has a yearly subscription, but I am not sure."
SwaggerHub is an integrated API Development platform, built for teams, that brings the core capabilities of the Swagger framework to design, build, document and deploy APIs. SwaggerHub enables development teams to collaborate and coordinate the entire lifecycle of an API with the flexibility to integrate with the toolset of your choice.
IBM API Connect is ranked 5th in API Management with 22 reviews while SwaggerHub is ranked 14th in API Management with 2 reviews. IBM API Connect is rated 8.0, while SwaggerHub is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of IBM API Connect writes "Stable and easy to set up but might be too costly for small businesses ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SwaggerHub writes "Good validations, good support and documentation, easy to deploy, and stable". IBM API Connect is most compared with Apigee, IBM DataPower Gateway, Microsoft Azure API Management, Mulesoft Anypoint API Manager and TIBCO Mashery API Management, whereas SwaggerHub is most compared with Apigee, Microsoft Azure API Management, Mulesoft Anypoint API Manager, Apiary and WSO2 API Manager. See our IBM API Connect vs. SwaggerHub report.
See our list of best API Management vendors.
We monitor all API Management reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.