Postman Reviews

The primary use case of this solution is for the API manual testing, manual verification to get the response, and for API automation.

The most valuable feature is the user interface because it provides a clear space for the URL, headers, body, prerequisites, and tests.

The solution can be improved by providing detailed error logs including the line the error took place to make it easier to correct. I would like to see functionality added for uploading specific scripts and not the entire collection.

I have been using the solution for three years.

The web app version is more stable than the desktop application.

The solution is scalable.

The support team is very responsive in resolving any issues we have.

Positive

The initial setup is straightforward. 

The solution is free for individuals, but for companies that use it across the organization, you have to pay per user. The solution is competitively priced.

I give the solution ten out of ten.

If you have a small amount of knowledge of HTTP status codes, how to make collections, and how to deal with environment variables is enough to use this solution.

We have 1000 people in our organization using the solution daily.

Our company uses the solution for single user regression testing of APIs. For each of our releases, we run a regression report that includes APIs contained in that release. 

We create structure suites by importing API information from swagger links, writing test scripts for APIs, and validating the values in our responses. This process can take some time but completed ignition suites can be reused. 

The solution provides visibility for PDF reports without needing to install plugins. 

Other solutions like JMeter require plugins which is not ideal. 

The solution has some user interface difficulties when conducting environment collections. 

It is important to be careful when storing information to ensure files are secure and not lost. Storing information can be a bit hectic. 

I have been using the solution for one year. 

The solution is stable and provides a good user experience. 

The solution is scalable. 

The initial setup is quite easy because installation automatically sets up collections. 

Our company implemented the solution which requires manually writing the process. 

The solution has a licensing fee which might be prohibitive.

There are open source options that are cost effective and offer API testing such as JMeter. 

If JMeter is too restrictive based on your project, then I suggest moving to the solution. 

We use the solution for attrition and single user testing of APIs. 

We use JMeter for automated API testing and load testing for multiple users. 

The solution requires an awareness of APIs, JSON format, XML format, schema, and Java scripting. 

I rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

When critical things happen, and we need immediate testing, we use Postman or SoapUI.  For example, when testing ServiceNow applications, we use Postman to call the APIs. The data sequence of the APIs has to be called, so we create test cases in Postman that call the appropriate data, authentication keys, and everything else we include in the data. And when we post about it, we include all that data. We fill in all of the required fields and send the request. When we get the response, it will include some data. We capture that and send it along on the subsequent request. So we usually use Postman to keep our directors informed during our integration and product testing. It's a pretty mature solution. Postman is about seven to eight years old. 

Postman has helped up with storing data, sharing test cases, and reporting. It's much easier to share test cases with teammates. I don't have to deliver an Excel sheet with all the test cases in there. It covers my list of requirements. For instance, it gives me the raw data, and if I need a new structure or format, it does everything automatically. Back in 2012, it was a browser-based application that you open in Chrome, but now it's a desktop application. It makes my life much easier. The browser-based app was frustrating because Chrome uses a lot of memory, and the browser often crashed. 

Postman allows you to incorporate and export the test cases we create. It enables me to share the test cases with my colleagues, so I don't have to copy them into an Excel sheet. Postman lets me export the dataset and share it with my team. They can use my test case for their testing. 

It lists all the tests I have done, so I don't have to report them separately. With SoapUI, I can't do that. So every time I run a test case in SoapUI, I have to note in an Excel sheet the data, response times, etc. Postman sets the data free. It records the calls, responses, and everything else I need. So I can create a report and then go back and see what testing happened in the past month. 

Testing API is pretty straightforward in Postman, but it falls short when testing web services. For example, when we test web services, there is a visual component that we can import in SoapUI but not in Postman. It's pretty challenging to work with visuals in Postman, but it's much easier in SoapUI. We used Postman to test web services three years ago, but we found it wasn't suitable, so we started using SoapUI. If Postman's web services testing were smarter, it would be the number one tool we use.

It would be great if Postman could add some more integration with the other testing tools we use. For example, it would be nice if we could create a test case scenario in Postman and execute it using Jenkins during the CFPB pipeline. That would be an outstanding feature that we could use. Writing a lot of code for test cases in Selenium is much more complicated than creating a small test in Postman. So that'll make our life much easier.

I've been working with Postman for the past six years.

Postman is pretty stable. When I was using the browser-based version, it took a while to load. Now it takes a little time but not very much. It's about as fast as any other application. But when I was using the web app in my Chrome browser, the browser would crash, and sometimes my system would freeze. So we had that issue earlier, but the performance has improved a lot.

Postman is scalable. I can have multiple instances of Postman running tests simultaneously. If necessary, I can open two Postman instances and compare them with another test. 

We also used LoadRunner to do some testing but that is for entirely different purposes. It's a load-testing tool for performance, whereas Postman is used more for functional testing. We mainly use Postman mainly to when a thing has occurred in your form. So when we're doing integration testing and all that, we use Postman. It is almost like a manual test where the processes are entirely different. For other purposes, we use tools like LoadRunner, Jenkins, and JMeter. We also use Selenium for automation testing and to execute our CFPB pipeline division. 

Setting up Postman is pretty simple. You just download it and run the installer. It only takes one person to install and you can do it in around 10 minutes.

I rate Postman eight out of 10. I recommend investing in Postman, which has a lot of features. You can use it to save scenarios then export, store, and reuse them. Postman already has a lot of features that I like.

I'm using Postman for manual testing of REST APIs. There are some built-in collections done by some of my teammates, so I use those.

The solution is deployed on a public cloud.

I have used some parameterization from a global variable, so that was working fine for me. It's easy to see different versions of responses. There's also a possibility for automation.

We cannot do database connections from Postman directly, and we don't have a way to do that. If they could implement auto-validations and assertions from SoapUI, that would be a very good feature.

We don't have a provision to go and connect to the database from Postman. That's one drawback. If you want to automate in Postman, there is a major drawback. Being a tester, you always want to cross-verify your data with the database. If the database is not connected, then part of your testing becomes manual.

I have used this solution for about seven years.

It's stable. Sometimes it has gone off, and I have had to rebuild the collections again. I've had to switch the logins sometimes. It has crashed twice, and I lost my suites and had to build it again.

Initial setup is easy. Sometimes we get the proxy errors, but when we go to the settings and disable the proxy things, it's pretty simple. Comparatively, SoapUI is easier for me.

Maybe some people who don't have a licensed version of Postman or ReadyAPI might feel that it's easier to automate with Postman, but I'm not sure about that because I haven't done it.

I would rate this solution as four out of ten.

If you don't have SoapUI or if you don't know about SoapUI, then of course you can use it. If you want to explore Postman, it's a free tool.

We primarily use the solution for testing and preparation of the base URL which I generated for the first tokenization. I prepare the test suite and the XML or Java core that give the input parameters.

The major role is the pre-requisition of the scripts in Postman - which is mandatory.

We can input parameters into Excel and execute for the application.

We work in many environments, including QA, SAP, production, pre-production, and proof. We use Postman for each and every release.  

Before anything goes to the master branch in GitHub, I'll completely check the code and unit test the complete scripting. I'll execute it one or two times, and once it's stabilized, I'll directly deploy it to the master branch.

The output has been very good.

There are lots of good features. 

Its initial setup is easy, depending on the operating system.

It is stable and reliable. 

The product is not expensive, although there is also the option for open-source, so it can be free to use.

We need better version compatibility. In open-source, the main drawback is when you go to integrate the plugins, it is entirely scripted. Sometimes the scripts aren't scripting.

The execution time should only be two or three seconds. 

We'd like to see some better UI in newer versions. 

I've been using the solution for 11 years.

The solution is stable. Before we deploy, we can check in for the local system. Once it is successful, then we'll go for the server side. That is a good practice to follow.

There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

We have 13 people using the product. It's just my team using the solution, as we have maintained the SSL certification separately.

I'm already an expert in the product and therefore do not need to contact technical support for help. If I have issues, I can troubleshoot on my own.

We chose this solution based on the project. Typically, the client requests something, and, depending on the client and the project's needs, we'll use what makes sense. We use the best tool for the job. If it happens to be this solution, then we use it. If it's something else, we use something else. 

If a file is in Windows, it is very easy to deploy the product. We can do configurations easily and handle test scripts well. It's all very straightforward.

However, other operating systems may be more difficult. The process varies depending on if you are using Windows, Unbuntu, or Linux, for example. 

Depending on the scripting, the deployment hardly takes 30 seconds to one minute. It'll check for the E2E level in the checkpoints, and how to trigger in the checkpoints.

The solution has both open-source and licensing options. You can pay for monthly licensing. However, that's not always necessary. There are also plugins that are available that we can implement. It's not an expensive product, even if you go for the license. They do have multiple licensing options as well. They have options for freelancers and mid-sized businesses as well as larger businesses. 

We are a Postman partner. 

I've been using an older version of the solution. I'm not on the latest deployment.

I'd advise others that it is important to have project middleware functionality, including for the access level. When I work with clients, I will ask for the certifications of the tool. Once the tool is initiated, 99.9% of the time,  there is no management involvement here. It's signed off on.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

I use Postman in my company for API testing.

Postman has a lot of additional features like the ones offered by SwaggerHub. Postman is a bit more complicated compared to SwaggerHub since you have to insert bearer tokens all the time and set everything from the start. I mainly use SwaggerHub as it is easy for me. I always get back to SwaggerHub from Postman.

Postman is a bit more of a complex tool, making it an area where improvements can be made.

Postman is good the way it is right now, so there's nothing to change in it.

I have been using Postman for a year. My company is a customer of the product.

It is a stable solution.

In my company, over 50 employees use Postman.

Given an opportunity, I would prefer to use Postman over SwaggerHub. People mostly prefer to use SwaggerHub over Postman.

The product's initial setup phase was easy and not difficult.

The solution is deployed on an on-premises model.

I would recommend others to use Postman. I am a QA, and I should know about different products before I use Postman. In short, a person should know to use it.

I rate the overall tool a nine out of ten.

Postman is a scripting tool.

I started using the solution when we did an SDN-based network implementation from Cisco. I got introduced to a particular scripting tool where I could actually put down everything in an Excel sheet. And if I want to configure, for example, ten ports, then I can actually do the configuration of everything in an Excel sheet. I can pass my credentials in Postman, and I can import the SQL script, and based on whether it's an infrastructure script or a configuration script, I can actually save it in Postman.

I'm using Postman to only push the scripts into the ACI, and that is a very limited use of Postman that we do right now.

I'm sure it might have other usages. That said, we have not explored other features beyond that at this point in time.

The initial setup is easy.

The solution is stable.

It is very user-friendly and has a nice UI.

My limited use of Postman has been to get the output of scripting in Postman or get the output from APIs and then open it in Postman or post the script. We don't use it much beyond that and therefore haven't really explored the features. It's hard to say what is lacking.

Postman does not have a check-in balance. Essentially what I mean by that is if there is something that is already configured on a particular device, it just overrides it without checking whether you really want to override it or not. Even if it is by mistake, if there is a dialogue box that is available before it overrides, it's just a much nicer feature to be notified if you're doing something by mistake.

I've been using the solution for a while. 

The solution is stable and reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. We haven't faced any issues.

I know that our team, which is three people, uses the solution. I'm not sure who else does in the company. We're all engineers. 

We have received all of the support we required. Postman has a very good team.

We use quite a few products from an infrastructure point of view. We use SolarWinds, both for server and infrastructure capacity, and we use a change management and a problem management tool. From a bandwidth monitoring perspective, we use a network analyzer; we use Splunk heavily. We do a lot of scripting tools using Postman and Python.

I'm more into Python since Python gives us many more API interjections and compatibility with a lot of other APIs. We started using Postman, and then we immediately moved to Python-based scripting.

The functionality that Python gives you concerning the available APIs and then the ability to put that in the Excel sheet is much better than Postman.

The solution is very easy to set up. There were no issues. 

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

We looked into other solutions. However, Cisco actually recommended Postman, so we went with this product. 

I'm an end-user.

I'm not sure which version of the solution I'm using. 

New users need to watch a few videos and understand the solution pretty well. If you are using Postman for the first time, never use the administrative credentials. It is very easy for you if you're using the administrative credentials to pass through the Postman's scripts. It is possible that you might override the configuration unknowingly. If that happens, that can actually bring down a good amount of your configuration or an earlier configuration. It's best to actually get the solution into a development environment before you actually do anything on production.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. It's a good, very user-friendly scripting tool. Anybody can learn it and start using it. However, new users do need a little bit of knowledge and must be willing to learn as they go.

Postman is an API regression suite, and we design different workflow center processes. We maintain the Postman tool and add JavaScript applications. Since it is not that robust, like ReadyAPI, we have to write many scripts to support it.

The UI is good. It's appealing and free, and everyone can use it.

Postman needs more advanced data-driven testing. We have to provide the data filter in runtime only. It's not like software, and we can add different data sources. That feature is not in Postman yet.

We have been using Postman for one year.

It is not that stable because the bigger the APIs, the higher the chance of crashes. Also, it takes up a lot of RAM and system memory, so it is not that reliable.

It is scalable, but it takes up a lot of resources. We have 40 users using Postman, mostly from the dev, automation and manual test teams. We use the solution weekly.

Postman has a support center, but they are not responsive. Many issues are still pending. I rate the technical support a six out of ten.

Neutral

You complete some setup processes for an application and have to provide the URL. It is not a complex setup. With a bit of understanding of API, it can be set up. I rate the setup an eight out of ten. There is a dedicated framework team for maintenance comprising about six people. Maintenance is required every three months.

Postman is open-source and free to use. I believe there is a corporate license they add to make it more robust and fast, but everyone mostly uses the free version.

I rate this solution a seven out of ten. You can use Postman if you are a beginner or trying to learn API. Small-scale organizations can also use it because it does not need any license.

Postman is gaining pace because it supports the Google Chrome compatibility rate and plugin support. It is easy to set it up for the testing team. It is a good tool, but it still needs improvement for a scalable API tool.

Regarding advice, there are some secure APIs in different organizations, so it's better to get approval from your manager or architect so that APIs are not exposed. Also, it is important to be cautious about the organization's sensitive data before implementing Postman.