Amazon API Gateway vs. IBM API Connect

API GW is great for giving access to asynchronous operations that are fast and don't need to be online all the time. Lambda functions are the classic example. In the past, an operation that is called on via an HTTP endpoint would be implemented using a server-based solution. With high availability in place that would include a server or two and a load balancer. Over time this setup can be costly, especially if the service is not used at full capacity; cycles are wasted when the servers are sitting there waiting to respond. If the operation can be distilled down to a function, an API GW + Lambda solution could be put in place that performs the operation as needed only when requested. Comparing the low price point for API GW requests and Lambda CPU+Memory, the savings can be night and day over the server-based implementation.

Incentivized

Overall, it can be stated that IBM API Connect has many benefits and can easily manage complicated integrations. The platform performs best in large environments, especially where microservices and processing of multiple API dependencies are required. On average, we have processed thousands of API calls within a second with good response time.

Incentivized

• API Gateway integrates well with AWS Lambda. This allows us to build a web server in the language and framework of our choice, deploy it as a Lambda function, and expose it through API Gateway.
• API Gateway manages API keys. Building rate limiting and request quota features are not trivial (or interesting).
• API Gateway's pricing can be very attractive for services that are accessed infrequently.

Incentivized

• API discovery feature is very helpful to allow us to scope the work required before diving into things.
• The ability to set permissions and rulesets at a user level is essential to restrict access to specific datasets.
• Ability for external users (those from outside our organisation) to leverage the API in more restrictive manner.

Incentivized

• I think there should be another way of enabling CORS. It basically creates OPTIONS for every endpoint, which makes your API Gateway look complicated.
• The integration timeout limit is 30 seconds, which limits you into that time.
• API Gateway UI should be improved and should work correctly when more than two people are adding/editing endpoints.

Incentivized

• That being stated, every thing you own will have both positive and negative aspects to its use. It can be perplexing at times, particularly when navigating between different functions.
• However, based on my usage of this application up until this point, I've discovered that the only time it lags is when it's downloading updates. Otherwise, it's excellent to utilise for all other customs.

Incentivized

IBM API Connect may be less appropriate for small-scale projects with minimal API management requirements, where simpler and more cost-effective solutions suffice. Organizations lacking the necessary technical expertise or resources to harness its full potential may face implementation challenges. In static environments with infrequent API changes or limited developer engagement, the platform's comprehensive features may be excessive for the task at hand.

Incentivized

We always had a great experience with the AWS support team. They were always on time and very dependable. It was a good partnership while we worked to resolve our issues.

Incentivized

Pricing is better at Amazon API gateway. Amazon API gateway is more user-friendly than SAP HANA Cloud. But SAP HANA Cloud supports more programming languages. The centralized management and monitoring system of Amazon API Gateway is more user-friendly. The User-Interface of Amazon API gateway is also better. Overall we can conclude that Amazon API Gateway provides a better work experience than SAP HANA.

Incentivized

Our decision to adopt IBM API Connect was driven by its comprehensive end-to-end API lifecycle management, which proved to be exceptionally well-suited to our B2B, Open Banking, and multi-fintech integration requirements. When compared with other solutions, API Connect stood out for its ability to externalize and govern APIs at scale, while offering enterprise-grade capabilities critical for our regulated environment. IBM App Connect serves as our internal integration middleware, focused on backend orchestration and data transformation. IBM watsonx acts as a complementary AI and data platform for exposing intelligent services especially with the code assistant functionality, it is API Connect that provides the crucial layer for external API exposure, management, and monetization. IBM DataPower is an incredibly secure and performant runtime, and lacks key enterprise features such as developer engagement, full API governance, and analytics. API Connect fills that gap seamlessly, offering a unified, secure, and scalable API management experience.

• Positive, which accelerated business deliveries in months
• Negative, but in our positive case, if you are going to change the solution in the future, you need to adjust several things for the new solution.
• Positive, users celebrated with ease of use (lower learning curve, lower cost).
• Positive - Pay according to usage

Incentivized

• It has decreased the average development time of an API by 15%.
• It has simplified the monitoring and tracking of development, keeping it simple and in one place.
• It has reduced the time wasted looking for information; it has reduced the mail loop sharing status and questions.

Incentivized