Anonymous UserVice President – Technology and Architecture at a venture capital & private equity firm
Anonymous UserAutomation Engineer at a computer software company
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"In our buying companies' perspective, it was easier to use compared to other platforms. The markets were pretty familiar with the solutions."
"Good at intercepting traffic and modeling APIs around that."
"This improved our organization, because it gives the management data to discuss for the next course of action and it suggests what to work on, as the next thing."
"It impresses me as a product because it never goes down. It always does what it is supposed to do."
"A big win for CA was the expertise of the local country support plus having support staff on site in a matter of hours, if required."
"It is helpful to have a central API that is hosted and managed."
"We loved the portal part the most, which had monetization and showed how people were using the stuff. It is a good product as a whole and has a lot of microservices and granular features."
"The solution fills our two most important concerns in seeking an API solution by providing a reliable gateway and security options."
"The mobile access gateway (MAG) is tremendous."
"When I have used technical support they helped me a lot. Sometimes they took a long time to respond because we had very complex issues that we asked them for help with, but I think it is a very good service."
"There should be an easier way to integrate with other solutions, even though it's the same API solution layer. Comparability will be a good improvement."
"They could focus more on pricing."
"From the last version, they have added more dashboard support, but there is still a lot they need to improve. In terms of monitoring, it's almost all covered. The interface can be improved, though."
"Some users say that the API lacks some features and is lagging behind the competition although that has not been my personal experience."
"The interface is Java which is difficult to make look very nice."
"The Portal lacks maturity. Since the move from Portal 3.x to 4.x, a lot of features were removed. It is slowly coming back. I can see a lot of changes are done in the "background" to decouple components and make it more flexible. Those changes are just not getting to the UI side quick enough."
"If they had different levels of support available then it would be easier to justify the costs."
"The delivery is bulky in terms of implementation. Its price could also be better. It is a very good product as compared to CA API, Google API, and WSO2 API, but its price is high. From the cloud-native perspective, some new features need to be added. It could also be made simpler to implement."
"The setup was not as straightforward as it should have been. Support should be improved."
"The architecture of the solution does not allow for flexibility in using different components for the gateway architecture."
"At the time we bought the product it was a perpetual users license and there has been no need for additional licensing fees."
"There are some costs for maintenance that we are charged, but that seems fair because we get the support."
"Keep in mind the non-product licensing, e.g., if you opt not to use the embedded SQL."
"If you do a TCO of more than five years, then you will see a big jump in costs for some vendors."
"It is a pricey product, although not extremely overpriced compared to competitors in the market."
"It was very high at that time. We are a Broadcom CA partner, and we got it only for testing purposes. We didn't pay anything for it."
"This solution is a bit more expensive than competitors."
Kong delivers a next generation API platform built for modern architectures. With a lightnight-fast, lightweight, and flexible core, Kong delivers sub-millisecond latency across all your services. Kong's is deployment-, vendor-, and pattern-agnostic, allowing you to run your services how you want, where you want, and with who you want - from baremetal to cloud, monolith to microservices, service mesh, and beyond.
To compete successfully and thrive today, enterprises across every industry need to transform. This process is not just about incremental improvement, but about evolving core businesses to meet the demands of today’s connected world.
CA API Management accelerates this digital transformation by providing the capabilities you need to bring systems together, secure these integrations, deliver better customer experiences faster and capitalize on new opportunities.
Read more at http://www.ca.com/api
Kong Enterprise is ranked 11th in API Management with 2 reviews while Layer7 API Management is ranked 7th in API Management with 9 reviews. Kong Enterprise is rated 8.6, while Layer7 API Management is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Kong Enterprise writes "Developers and Architects favourite, great for initial adaptors, companies scaling up". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Layer7 API Management writes "Serves to standardise routing messaging services into a single API view with multiple channels". Kong Enterprise is most compared with Microsoft Azure API Management, Mulesoft Anypoint API Manager, WSO2 API Manager, Apigee and IBM API Connect, whereas Layer7 API Management is most compared with Apigee, Amazon API Gateway, Mulesoft Anypoint API Manager, Microsoft Azure API Management and IBM API Connect. See our Kong Enterprise vs. Layer7 API Management 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.