The setup was great. Depending upon the size of the program, and the number of integrations that you are having, you will keep on adding the people based on the business requirement.

It is complex because it requires a lot of development effort and to understand the business. Additionally, it also requires an understanding of the requirement of how the API behaves. It should be very generic. So first, we can start off with SOAP services because the SOAP services accept only the XML. There should be some kind of configurations that you are plugging in the API Manager where you just define a scheme. This is just an idea where you have to define your scheme as in your platform API Manager and then define your SOAP services. API Manager will do a protocol transformation so we don't touch the existing applications. 

Many clients will also be attracted to this approach. The solution is deployed on the cloud. Deployment time depends on the deployment topology. In the cloud, it is pretty fast. We leverage the CICD framework for any deployment. It takes a maximum of a minute. One person can handle the deployment. There is no maintenance required for the product.

The initial setup was straightforward.

The installation is abstracted and complex from the user's point of view. But MuleSoft provides support. It is somehow abstract, but for the customers, the integration and setup are simple processes.

It depends on different kinds of platforms, customer-hosted platforms, or new self-hosted platforms. If you are going with a new self-hosted platform, then there isn’t much to be done. It's very easy to set up.

But if you're going with a customer infrastructure or a customer-hosted platform, then it depends on the customer's settings and the teams. It involves time to set up the infrastructure. They need a platform and a landscape so that they can deploy it.

MuleSoft has a lot of maintenance solutions that help the applications notify or trigger alerts whenever any error occurs or is encountered in the application. It can be leveraged, making maintenance easy. 

So far, we've had pretty straightforward setups. That said, we are looking to build a more complex project right now, and that implementation may be more involved. 

For the initial setup experience with MuleSoft's Anypoint, I would rate the easiness of the setup at five out of ten. While we hoped for a quicker and smoother setup process, we encountered some complications and challenges.

The deployment process for MuleSoft's Anypoint takes varying amounts of time depending on factors like our organization's architecture and familiarity with the technology. It wasn't always straightforward due to the complexities involved, such as integrating with Kubernetes.

The initial setup can be a bit challenging but usage of the solution after that is straightforward. 

CloudHub is straightforward. There are alternatives as well like RTF that can be deployed on any cloud or bare metal,  On-premises deployments . It's more complicated if it's on bare metal. Mulesoft have professional services team that can assist on initial setup. 

I would rate the CloudHub setup a four and a half out of five, and for an on-premises setup, I would rate it a three out of five.

Mulesoft Anypoint API Manager is on the cloud and there is no installation.

The initial setup is very straightforward. We didn't have any issues at all. It's simple and easy to implement and not overly complex.

We have 30 to 50 people that comprise a support team that can help handle any maintenance issues. 

It is complicated. I would rate it three out of ten. We collaborated with professional service experts based in Hong Kong. When delving into the architectural aspects, it became apparent that the setup was intricate. Consequently, we relied on their assistance for both the installation process and the architectural design. The project itself extended over a considerable duration, not solely due to its length but also because it involved multiple components.

I rate the initial setup an eight out of ten. It is straightforward, and deploying the solution took a week or two.

The solution is pretty easy to set up. I'd rate the ease of setup ten out of ten. That said, I was not involved in the initial deployment directly.

The initial setup, if you go back three or three and a half years, definitely, for us, was complex. As a bank, we run through a lot of securities. Since then, they have matured the process. They worked with us, to do some upgrades. Kong also will have to do a few things for us, once we migrate. Currently, we are already finding some issues, which Kong is trying to help us and fix it. However, Mule took a bit of time to set up. If we were to do it now, it would be easy. 

They have come up with API management and cloud hub, which is the manual service. We have not used it much, however, there are some use cases from a different part of the bank that tried it out. It's a good option as you get rid of the whole operational management side of the whole control pane. The control pane we are running is a PC 1.7.3 or something, which is old and coming up on the end of support.

The cloud hub may solve the problem of the control pane, even though they have some issues with the maintenance windows and stuff. Due to the fact that the policies are cast in the control pane, and run times can struggle, if the control pane goes down or needs maintenance because we need a hundred percent of availability in some way or other, it needs to be resilient also. The maintenance windows can cause trouble for us in banking.

The initial setup of the Mulesoft Anypoint API Manager is simple. The whole process did not take a lot of time.

The initial setup is very straightforward. It's much more straightforward, that, for example, Apigee, which is more difficult to execute.

I rate the product's initial setup phase a nine out of ten.

Experienced developers can deploy the product in a day.

The ease of maintenance depends on how you design your solution. You should consider having a team, typically consisting of four or five members for maintenance.

The tool's setup is easy and quick. 

Before joining the team, most of Mulesoft had already been initiated. But what I realized was that most of my colleagues and supervisors don't have the API experience. Secondly, even though they have the experience, Mulesoft gives a lot of tutorials on their website, but most of them are not self-explanatory. They insist that customers find a Mulesoft expert, mostly because they seek the assistance from the Mulesoft consulting group to come on board and do some due diligence, and then you will hear, "Somebody will come and install it." That is what they have been doing over a period of time. I think that this process is still continuing. I don't think that's been stopped.

So, we had a challenge with configuring initially when we installed Mulesoft, but you really have to understand the concepts of Mulesoft, and if you follow the regulatory and follow the manual if you have a little bit of experience, I think it's not a big deal. You can configure Mulesoft very efficiently.

In terms of the implementation strategy, initially, we were blindly following whatever the Mulesoft consultants said. They had been talking about creating your architecture, and this is what was involved in the deployment methodology. For almost one and one and a half year, we have been following them. Lately, we've changed the strategy, and we've customized our deployment strategy. We merged with Kubernetes, Jenkins, and we have JIRA inside our organization.

To make our customization comply with Docker and Kubernetes, it took some amount of time, but it consumes a bit amount of time to configure all these items within the Mulesoft and run it. It took around three to four months of time to complete this exercise because we struggled with the documents. They're not as explanatory as they should be. Also, whenever we tried to reach out the Mulesoft, they said that they would come out and they would do it, and they would do some consulting. But they would charge more. To avoid extra cost, we did our own exercise, and frankly speaking, the tutorials are not self-explanatory. The majority of this Docker and Kubernetes is not as mature as it should be when compared with Apigee. Apigee is very fast. 

Going forward, we're going to migrate all of our applications to Azure. That has also hasn't been addressed yet. But the concern has already been raised. I don't know when they're going to address it. Yeah, these are the challenges. The tutorials, whatever they give, is not self-explanatory. It takes a lot of time to build any new initiative as far as Mulesoft is concerned.

We already have our full development center. The email team is there who've been supporting us. We have an internal workforce in there we've been doing. Along with me, there are two more architects who report to me. They do their job, and one dedicated Mulesoft integration architect, I can say the solution architect, but she supports the Mulesoft activities. The Mulesoft delivery manager is there. They're checking this challenge. They're accepting this challenge, and we're looking all those things.

I'm a technical guy, so it was pretty straightforward by reading the documents.

Deployment took five months.

The initial setup is complex compared to solutions such as Kong or Tyk. There are many things to keep in mind concerning configuration, features, and different options for different systems. I would say that overall, it is very complex.

When all of the requirements are well defined, well described, clear, and consistent, the implementation is fast and can be done in a matter of weeks.

Maintenance only needs to be done when there is a change in business or operational processes. Also, there are some updates that are required but usually not many.

The initial setup process is complex for entry-level resources. They need to learn the server-side component of integration. A full-stack developer finds the process easier.

I was not involved in the installation.

The initial setup was relatively easy. I would rate it a 10, on a scale from one to 10, with one being the hardest and 10 being the easiest. The deployment process was done with an in-house team of three people.

The initial setup is easy. You may have some issues when you deploy it for the first time if the team is new, but once you do it, the next time it will not take much time.

You just need half a day or one day of training, and any team member can implement the solution.

Maintenance wise, it doesn't require a lot because it's on the cloud. You do have to monitor some things on your end, but other maintenance issues are taken care of by MuleSoft.

The initial setup was pretty straightforward because we purchased support from Mulesoft, so their engineers took care of it. However, using it within the user-integrated cloud was a bit tricky.

The initial setup is quite straightforward and user-friendly. It's mostly deployed on the cloud.

Deployment is quick since it's a SaaS model. We primarily focus on configuration.

The initial setup for MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager was easy.

I'm giving it a ten out of ten in terms of setup.

My company has a lot of APIs, so for thirty applications, the total time it took to deploy MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager was two hours.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward and takes a couple of hours, but it depends very much on the licensing because not all licenses cover all the features MuleSoft has. Sometimes, especially on CloudHub, it can look like everything will be nice and easy, but if you're expecting to have some features and don't see them, you have to go back to MuleSoft and find out what's happening.

The initial setup is easy. You deploy it or install it to the project. To set up your project in MuleSoft, you need API ops tools, and Anypoint is one option for this setup.

MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager's deployment is easy. They had already completed the implementation when I got involved. My role was more about ensuring that everything was functioning properly. 

The initial setup is complex when it comes to establishing the connectivity between on-premise services and cloud services. Deployment took between six and eight months. We have two junior resources who are responsible for maintenance but the solution does not require much maintenance after being pushed to production. 

The initial setup of Mulesoft Anypoint API Manager was complex. For those running Kubernetes it is an even higher difficulty level for the initial implementation.

The initial setup is not completely straightforward but it's not too complex either. 

I'm not overly familiar with the initial setup, however, my understanding is that it is an average level of difficulty. It's not overly simple or complex. 

We have four people that can handle maintenance duties. They are managers and admins. 

In terms of initial setup, of course WSO2 with Kong is more simple than this.

The initial setup is fine for the cloud version but very complex for the on-prem deployment. 

The initial setup isn't complex, although when you are installing the solution you need a moderate amount of competency.

Deployment took about six months.

No, setup has been easy, we setup a whole stack dev to production within a business day.

The initial setup is straightforward.

The initial setup is straightforward. From a management point of view, it is okay.

The initial setup is complex.

The initial setup was straightforward. The length of time required for deployment varies based on the requirements. It is not always the same, but the average is a few hours.

The initial setup was easy.