Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
IBM - API Connect vs Postman: What are the differences?
Key differences between IBM - API Connect and Postman
IBM API Connect and Postman are two popular tools used by developers for working with APIs. While both tools have similar functions, they differ in several key aspects, including:
Scalability and Integration: IBM API Connect offers a scalable platform that allows organizations to manage and connect multiple APIs seamlessly. It provides comprehensive integration capabilities and supports end-to-end API lifecycle management. On the other hand, Postman is primarily designed for individual developers and lacks the enterprise-level scalability and integration capabilities offered by IBM API Connect.
Security and Governance: IBM API Connect offers robust security features, including authentication, authorization, and OAuth support. It allows API developers to define security policies and enforce them across the API ecosystem. Postman, although it provides some basic security features, doesn't have the same level of built-in security and governance capabilities as API Connect.
Developer Portal and Documentation: IBM API Connect includes a self-service developer portal, which acts as a central hub for API documentation, tutorials, and code samples. It enables developers to discover, explore, and consume APIs easily. In contrast, while Postman does provide documentation capabilities, it lacks a dedicated developer portal, making it less user-friendly for API consumers.
API Lifecycle Management: IBM API Connect offers a comprehensive set of tools and features to manage the entire lifecycle of APIs, including design, development, deployment, and versioning. It provides seamless integration with popular development tools and supports DevOps practices. In contrast, Postman primarily focuses on API testing and lacks the extensive lifecycle management capabilities provided by API Connect.
Collaboration and Teamwork: IBM API Connect offers collaboration features that enable multiple developers and teams to work together on API development. It supports role-based access control, collaboration tools, and version control, allowing teams to collaborate seamlessly. Postman, on the other hand, is more suited for individual users and doesn't provide the same level of collaboration capabilities as API Connect.
Analytics and Monitoring: IBM API Connect includes built-in analytics and monitoring capabilities, which provide real-time insights into API usage, performance, and health. It allows API providers to track API consumption, identify bottlenecks, and make data-driven decisions. Postman, while it does provide some basic monitoring features, lacks the comprehensive analytics and monitoring capabilities offered by API Connect.
In summary, IBM API Connect is an enterprise-grade API management solution that offers scalability, security, documentation, lifecycle management, collaboration, and analytics features. On the other hand, Postman is a lightweight API testing and development tool more suited for individual developers, lacking the enterprise-level features provided by API Connect.
From a StackShare Community member: "I just started working for a start-up and we are in desperate need of better documentation for our API. Currently our API docs is in a README.md file. We are evaluating Postman and Swagger UI. Since there are many options and I was wondering what other StackSharers would recommend?"
I use Postman because of the ease of team-management, using workspaces and teams, runner, collections, environment variables, test-scripts (post execution), variable management (pre and post execution), folders (inside collections, for better management of APIs), newman, easy-ci-integration (and probably a few more things that I am not able to recall right now).
I use Swagger UI because it's an easy tool for end-consumers to visualize and test our APIs. It focuses on that ! And it's directly embedded and delivered with the APIs. Postman's built-in tools aren't bad, but their main focus isn't the documentation and also, they are hosted outside the project.
I recommend Postman because it's easy to use with history option. Also, it has very great features like runner, collections, test scripts runners, defining environment variables and simple exporting and importing data.
Postman supports automation and organization in a way that Insomnia just doesn't. Admittedly, Insomnia makes it slightly easy to query the data that you get back (in a very MongoDB-esque query language) but Postman sets you up to develop the code that you would use in development/testing right in the editor.
Pros of IBM API Connect
- Innovated Approach, Super customer support6
- Secure API Management2
Pros of Postman
- Easy to use490
- Great tool369
- Makes developing rest api's easy peasy276
- Easy setup, looks good156
- The best api workflow out there144
- It's the best53
- History feature53
- Adds real value to my workflow44
- Great interface that magically predicts your needs43
- The best in class app35
- Can save and share script12
- Fully featured without looking cluttered10
- Collections8
- Option to run scrips8
- Global/Environment Variables8
- Shareable Collections7
- Dead simple and useful. Excellent7
- Dark theme easy on the eyes7
- Awesome customer support6
- Great integration with newman6
- Documentation5
- Simple5
- The test script is useful5
- Saves responses4
- This has simplified my testing significantly4
- Makes testing API's as easy as 1,2,34
- Easy as pie4
- API-network3
- I'd recommend it to everyone who works with apis3
- Mocking API calls with predefined response3
- Now supports GraphQL2
- Postman Runner CI Integration2
- Easy to setup, test and provides test storage2
- Continuous integration using newman2
- Pre-request Script and Test attributes are invaluable2
- Runner2
- Graph2
- <a href="http://fixbit.com/">useful tool</a>1
Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions
Cons of IBM API Connect
- Not open, no community research. No Trial download2
Cons of Postman
- Stores credentials in HTTP10
- Bloated features and UI9
- Cumbersome to switch authentication tokens8
- Poor GraphQL support7
- Expensive5
- Not free after 5 users3
- Can't prompt for per-request variables3
- Import swagger1
- Support websocket1
- Import curl1
