WSO2 API Manager Reviews

Our normal use case for API Manager is to create pre-configured store users. The administrator who creates those users then sends them their credentials and secure links.  We are running API Manager on a Tomcat server. Currently, I am the main person who works with API Manager, because it requires a proper understanding of the APIs. 

When looking at things from an enterprise point of view, it's often difficult to see the benefit of a tool. Most of the time, we need to install a plug-in without having any lapse in services or restarting the application. The WSO2 platform can do all deployments without any downtime.

API Manager upgraded to 3.2 recently, and it has more flexibility in terms of authentication methods. In the version we're currently using, there is only a token. We couldn't do basic authentication.

In version 2.5, there is room for improvement on the UI. That may have been addressed in the upgrade to 3.2, which uses the latest front-end framework that's commonly used in other solutions like JIRA. I would need to play around with the upgrade, but I believe the UI issue has been addressed. I can only speak about my experience with the 2.5 version because that's the one I've been able to use extensively. I can say that user management is not really flexible. So, if I want to create 1,000 store users, I can't do it as a publisher. You have to register as a store user using the store URL. It would be nice if API Manager had that functionality as an administrator, so you would have a user management interface where you can create store users.  

I've been using API Manager for more than five years. I was using the platform before the recent overhaul. They now have this new interface where they migrated the front end to using view. So I think view framework or react, one of the two, but it's been a while.

API Manager is stable. We haven't had any stability issues at all. It has run on Tomcat for as long as I know, and it's a stable web service so.

In terms of scalability, it has so far been able to handle the traffic on the platform. We haven't had any issues where we've had downtime because too many requests were coming in per second.

The setup was pretty straightforward. I asked my colleague to do the setup. Since I've been working on it for a while, it probably wouldn't be a challenge. We didn't use many resources to do the setup or spend much time setting up the application because they've added more deployment scripts to make the solution easier to deploy.

Maybe I lack the curiosity to push me to check other platforms. Even when I try checking them, I've not actually checked other competitors because the major competitor got acquired by another platform.

I would rate API Manager eight out of 10. The advice I would give to anyone considering API Manager is to take the time to understand how the platform works. It doesn't matter how good a thing is if you don't understand the purpose. For example, you need to understand the use case for service orchestration. And once you know that, you know why it makes sense to bring in WSO2 API Manager. This is a better way to go about things than to force yourself into it, only to find out that it's not working for you at the end of the day. 

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.

We use WSO2 API Manager to manage APIs.

WSO2 API Manager's most valuable features are the simple interface that is easy to use and the APIs lifecycle.

WSO2 API Manager could improve the API approval system.

I have been using WSO2 API Manager for approximately one year.

The stability of the WSO2 API Manager is good.

We have used the open-source version, but I'm we have now switched to the enterprise version, I am not of the differences. The rate-limiting in the open-source seems not to work. When I add buy limits, it does not work correctly. I do not think this issue is in the enterprise version.

This solution is suitable for medium to large businesses.

The technical support from the WSO2 API Manager is very good. When there is an issue they fix the ticket very quickly.

I have not used other API management systems.

The initial setup of WSO2 API Manager is simple.

WSO2 API Manager is a low-cost solution. It is one of the most affordable solutions. 

I find the solution to be good overall. The solution is receiving a lot of attention and is attracting investors.

I rate WSO2 API Manager a seven out of ten.

We are a banking solution and use WSO2 to offer our services to banks.

WSO2 helps to expose our internal APIs to the outside world.

We had some problems with the reverse proxy not being able to invoke fully qualified domain names, so we have to build some custom scripts to solve this issue. In the next release, WSO2 should make multifactor authentication simpler.

I've been using WSO2 API Manager for two years.

WSO2 is very stable.

WSO2's scalability is very good because we deployed using a microgateway-driven approach on OCP, which takes care of scaling. I would rate its scalability as 4.5 out of five.

WSO2's technical support is good.

Positive

I previously used IBM App Connect but switched to WSO2 for a number of reasons, including cost, complexity, technical resource availability, troubleshooting, and multiple practice.

The pattern we followed to set up WSO2 was a bit complex, but the end goal was very clear, so the setup itself was straightforward and took about two days. I would rate the setup experience as four out of five.

We used a third-party team.

I would advise anybody thinking of implementing WSO2 to go for it. I would give WSO2 a rating of eight out of ten.

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.

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.