Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Paw vs Postman: What are the differences?
What is Paw? 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.
What is Postman? Only complete API development environment. Postman is the only complete API development environment, used by nearly five million developers and more than 100,000 companies worldwide.
Paw and Postman can be categorized as "API" tools.
Some of the features offered by Paw are:
- 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.
On the other hand, Postman provides the following key features:
- Compact layout
- HTTP requests with file upload support
- Formatted API responses for JSON and XML
"Great interface" is the primary reason why developers consider Paw over the competitors, whereas "Easy to use" was stated as the key factor in picking Postman.
According to the StackShare community, Postman has a broader approval, being mentioned in 1725 company stacks & 2168 developers stacks; compared to Paw, which is listed in 17 company stacks and 12 developer stacks.
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.
PostmanI 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.
OpenAPI is an excellent tool for creating interactive and hosted documents when releasing an API to the public. We will leverage this, specifically for the public facing APIs that customers can integrate into (to automate creating projects and storing experiment data). Postman is more complicated to share with others and is not as rich for documentation.
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 Paw
- Great interface46
- Easy to use38
- More stable and performant than the others25
- Saves endpoints list for testing16
- Supports environment variables13
- Integrations12
- Multi-Dimension Environment Settings9
- Paste curl commands into Paw4
- Creates code for any language or framework2
Pros of Postman
- Easy to use486
- Great tool369
- Makes developing rest api's easy peasy275
- Easy setup, looks good156
- The best api workflow out there143
- History feature53
- It's the best53
- Adds real value to my workflow44
- Great interface that magically predicts your needs42
- The best in class app34
- Can save and share script11
- Fully featured without looking cluttered9
- Option to run scrips7
- Collections7
- Global/Environment Variables7
- Dark theme easy on the eyes6
- Shareable Collections6
- Dead simple and useful. Excellent6
- Great integration with newman5
- Awesome customer support5
- Documentation4
- The test script is useful4
- Simple4
- This has simplified my testing significantly3
- Easy as pie3
- Makes testing API's as easy as 1,2,33
- Saves responses3
- API-network2
- Mocking API calls with predefined response2
- I'd recommend it to everyone who works with apis2
- Easy to setup, test and provides test storage1
- Graph1
- Postman Runner CI Integration1
- Now supports GraphQL1
- Continuous integration using newman1
- Pre-request Script and Test attributes are invaluable1
- Runner0
- <a href="http://fixbit.com/">useful tool</a>0
Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions
Cons of Paw
- It's not free3
- MacOS Only2
Cons of Postman
- Stores credentials in HTTP9
- Poor GraphQL support7
- Bloated features and UI7
- Cumbersome to switch authentication tokens7
- Expensive3
- Not free after 5 users2
- Can't prompt for per-request variables2
- Support websocket1
- Import curl1
- Import swagger1
