Apigility vs Paw: What are the differences?
Developers describe Apigility as "The world's easiest way to create high-quality APIs". An API-based architecture is essential to agile delivery of mobile applications. Apigility provides JSON representations that can be parsed and used in any mobile framework; write for the web or native applications simultaneously!. On the other hand, Paw is detailed as "The ultimate REST client for Mac". Paw is a full-featured and beautifully designed Mac app that makes interaction with REST services delightful. Either you are an API maker or consumer, Paw helps you build HTTP requests, inspect the server's response and even generate client code.
Apigility and Paw can be primarily classified as "API" tools.
Some of the features offered by Apigility are:
- RESTful or RPC services
- JSON (specifically, HAL)
- Problem Details for HTTP APIs
On the other hand, Paw provides the following key features:
- Organize your Requests, make Groups or sort by Host, Name, etc.
- Easily build your requests, enjoy Formatters and Dynamic Values.
- See Request and Response infos, headers, and body.
Apigility is an open source tool with 477 GitHub stars and 144 GitHub forks. Here's a link to Apigility's open source repository on GitHub.
What is Apigility?
What is Paw?
Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Sign up to add, upvote and see more prosMake informed product decisions
What are the cons of using Apigility?
Sign up to get full access to all the companiesMake informed product decisions
What tools integrate with Paw?
We've tried a couple REST clients over the years, and Insomnia REST Client has won us over the most. Here's what we like about it compared to other contenders in this category:
- Uncluttered UI. Things are only in your face when you need them, and the app is visually organized in an intuitive manner.
- Native Mac app. We wanted the look and feel to be on par with other apps in our OS rather than a web app / Electron app (cough Postman).
- Easy team sync. Other apps have this too, but Insomnia's model best sets the "set and forget" mentality. Syncs are near instant and I'm always assured that I'm working on the latest version of API endpoints. Apps like Paw use a git-based approach to revision history, but I think this actually over-complicates the sync feature. For ensuring I'm always working on the latest version of something, I'd rather have the sync model be closer to Dropbox's than git's, and Insomnia is closer to Dropbox in that regard.
Some features like automatic public-facing documentation aren't supported, but we currently don't have any public APIs, so this didn't matter to us.
Apigility is loyal to the standards; we do not need a framework to write custom REST APIs, anyone can do that; we need a framework that makes sticking with the standards easy.
Every PHP framework should be designed in such a way, that it forces you to think about what you are doing, the current PHP mind-set is too much crowded with lazy documentation of custom-solutions that do not work as expected (because the language gives you too much freedom).
With Apigility it is easy to build RESTful APIs in a declarative way, so that you do not need to write tests for every API Service you create, because the underlying code doesn't change or break, all functionality comes within the framework, that has already been tested.
You do not need to write any boiler plate code, which is huge plus compared to Symfony 2 and the likes.
Apigility has had some reliability problems with newest releases and as far as I know, they do not report which release is the latest stable. But of course, they reached the 1.0 in 2015.
Paw allows me to interface with an API prior to starting UI work that requires the API. This helps me understand what data is required to be sent to the API, and what to expect back.
In cases where I develop the API, Paw helps me to test as I'm developing, ensuring changes I make aren't breaking other parts of the API.