Microsoft's Azure API Management supports creation of API.
$0.04
Lightweight and serverless version of API Management service, billed per execution
SnapLogic
Score 6.9 out of 10
N/A
SnapLogic is a cloud integration platform with a self-service capacity supported by over 450 prebuilt modifiable connectors. SnapLogic also offers real-time and batch integration processes for interfacing with external data sources, a drag-and-drop interface, and use of the vendors’ Iris AI.
N/A
Pricing
Azure API Management
SnapLogic
Editions & Modules
Consumption
0.042 per 10,000 calls
Lightweight and serverless version of API Management service, billed per execution
Developer
$48.04
per month Non-production use cases and evaluations
Basic
$147.17
per month Entry-level production use cases
Standard
$686.72
per month Medium-volume production use cases
Premium
$2,795.17
per month High-volume or enterprise production use cases
Isolated
TBA
per month Enterprise production use cases requiring high degree of isolation
Apigee is by Google and seems to be promising. The cost seems high though. With Azure, we do not have to make any special purchases. CapEx vs OpEx! But, Apigee could be more environment independent compared to Azure APIM. The promise of speed by Apigee is also better compared …
It’s a great tool, and so easy to seamlessly connect into your current Azure world that it’s hard not to look at it or even test the waters with it. It’s priced well, and is feature-rich enough to accomplish most tasks. I think the ease of having everything together and the …
Other providers found it difficult to allow us to use their services on our cloud premises (exclusively in our AWS accounts) which we need for compliance. SnapLogic was able to give us this guarantee.
Boomi was our runner-up product. The pricing model was much higher and cost-prohibitive. They were not as flexible with pricing on a non-profit higher education institution. We did love their integration code library shared across all clients. The user interface was on par …
We opted for SnapLogic due its ease of use and the flexibility it offers, it was the platform that was strongest in both application integration and data integration and both were use cases we wanted to be able to cover.
The simple interface and ease of building the pipelines with "snaps" was a selling point for SnapLogic. Amongst the multitude of snap packs available with new ones constantly being added. The support and vendor engagement was also very pleasant. Although amongst the more …
SnapLogic suits my company's needs better than Scribe because it's a lot less complicated to move data between different systems, and the monitoring aspect is way better. Scribe does have better customer support though, as SnapLogic is a lot more hands-off. Scribe feels easier …
Snaplogic is great for what it is. It's not an all-inclusive solution. You likely don't need a snap license when you have one or two systems, or you don't have a centralized SQL database. Once you have multiple tools and you start automating reports you'll want a license to tie …
Earlier we used to work on this tool, but since SnapLogic came in the picture it gave us a lot of confidence to work faster, easier and in a more convenient way. So I would recommend using SnapLogic because of its simple functionality for smaller organizations. It is fast at …
SnapLogic does better API integration than Informatica Power Center. Informatica has better re-usable component integration and version control than Snaplogic. Metadata lineage for Informatica is better than SnapLogic. I do not think that SnapLogic is better than SSIS.
Snaplogic was much better than Boomi in the customer response time. In fact, this was one of the deal-breaker reasons. SnapLogic was better than Informatica in its ability to read directly from the sources/SFTP files instead of downloading them. Pentaho is great, but we wanted …
We selected SnapLogic because it paired really well with the two cloud systems we needed to move data between. The pre-built connecters allowed us to easily set up our pipelines to create the ETL of data between the two systems.
The range of policies that enable the APIs to loosely couple it with security, rate limit, retry, etc. are good. We can easily tie authentication mechanisms to external and other internal services without having to modify the backend.
Snaplogic is unique from other IPASS tools if you're very sensitive about data security as they have an on-premise option where your data never needs to leave your data center. And data pipelines can be quickly created if Snaplogic has the requisite connector to your data sources. On the downside, if you're transforming a large amount of data for example in training machine learning models, a tool with elastic compute capability is more appropriate.
Cost - the upfront cost is a bit restrictive. I've been told it is because there are a few underlying VMs that are running this service. So if you're just starting out with API management, it can be an expensive proposition. Value increases as you add additional APIs. If you're using Azure B2C for the developer portal, you'll require Standard or Premium since they support AAD integration.
Security granularity - at time of writing, APIM doesn't support breaking out operations to products. For example, if you have an API that has a GET and a POST operation, and you want the POST operation to require a different subscription. There is a work around, but it makes management a bit messy.
Developer and Publisher portal - it's a little weird. Microsoft hasn't migrated all the publisher portal functionality into the "native" Azure portal. So some of it feels a little weird - especially when working with the content management side of things for the developer portal.
Scaling - while it's easy to scale up, the cost of APIM ramps up very quickly. Standard -> Premium is a 4x jump.
This has been hands down the BEST software company I have ever used and dealt with. I am a 25 year IT veteran at this college. They go above and beyond in soliciting our feedback/input and proactively follow up about bugs, issues, etc. I have given multiple potential clients my thoughts and after seeing the SL demo they all sign up. I appreciate their support model, it's REFRESHING!
They can be prompt but they have not been as useful as I've wanted. We had a bug that affected many of our customers through an API connection between SnapLogic and our platform. Eventually they were able to figure it out, but it took a long time of negotiating between our engineering team and theirs. Additionally, we installed the SnapLogic groundplex for our customers and we've run into a bunch of problems of connectivity. If SnapLogic offered to be on those calls with our clients to troubleshoot how to fix these problems, I would give them a better grade here.
Boomi was our runner-up product. The pricing model was much higher and cost-prohibitive. They were not as flexible with pricing on a non-profit higher education institution. We did love their integration code library shared across all clients. The user interface was on par with Snaplogic as well as the features that come included. Overall, seemed like a solid product just found something better for a lower price point.
It’s really pay as you go, so it's not that costly to get in and try it out. There’s no expensive client to buy and manage, but you do need to stay on top of the rapidly changing Azure environment to be sure you upgrade or adjust when needed.
It’s not great having more than one API tool, but it’s ok to spread out your work, as you always want the right tool for the right job. For example, if you are a Salesforce-heavy organization, I’d go with Mule over Azure.
It was easy getting an external consultant access to the tool to build their own API for a project they were working on for us.
We had a positive impact at our organization where handful of developers were able to integrate more than 50 systems in less than a year. It has helped us a lot by providing access to data that was previously not possible or unimaginable or get in such easy format.
The only place where it didn't have a positive impact was for a realtime application integration project requiring on the fly aggregations, wherein this tool claimed it could do it but wasn't able to.