We performed a comparison between Microsoft Azure API Management and SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two API Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It seems quite good so far. It handles our current workload well, and I'm optimistic it can scale effectively as our needs grow."
"The Azure Active Directory Synchronization is quite good."
"The solution has overall high performance."
"The product gives API gateway-related features, like throttling, which are easy to use and low-code/no-code."
"The solution is quite stable. We have no issues with it. there have been no crashes and we haven't experienced bugs or glitches. It's been quite reliable."
"I like that security features can be integrated with API Management. I also like that you can perform rate-limiting and throttling functions."
"Access control is the most valuable aspect."
"The price is pretty reasonable for us."
"One of the most valuable features is the option to have all integration patterns constantly updated in one platform. That is the main strength I see in using SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite (BIS). It means I can use a very old-fashioned pattern, combined with a very modern pattern. There are no limitations in terms of combining components because all the components simply fit together."
"SEEBURGER has helped us to enable digital business transformation. Every time we add a new customer, there is a digital footprint. This is no longer a manual process."
"When orders come in they go into our ERP system directly, so there is integration there."
"We can code in Java, which is really good feature. There is very vast command available, which can be used in mapping."
"It is stable and reliable. We have not had any issues."
"It used to take half an hour to move one file from one location to another. Now, it takes 10 minutes."
"Having the SEEBURGER consulting team perform the installation alleviates a lot of headaches and ensures a stable system."
"We can use it to script and monitor processes."
"Microsoft Azure API Management is lagging behind Apigee and should also have a better CICD process."
"The hybrid part could be improved because API Management is entirely cloud-based, but some of our resources are on-prem, so formatting is an issue. Our goal is dual implementation."
"The cloud deployment performance could be better."
"The user interface needs improvement."
"An area for improvement in Microsoft Azure API Management is deployment, in particular, the deployment of versions in Oryx. The development to production instance isn't adequate for me and needs to be improved. Microsoft Azure API Management lacks automation, which is another area for improvement."
"When you start with Azure API management, you also need to onboard the Azure console and the Azure cloud environment, which comes with a price."
"Sometimes when immediate support is required, it isn't available."
"It should be easier to integrate."
"The speed of development needs improvement. If you acquire any customization, it can be a slightly slow process. I would like to see more flexibility around customizations. The time frame right now depends on the sophistication and customization, but we have to go through a process of getting them to develop, implement, and test it. This might take a couple of weeks. If it was a simpler system to customize, the time could probably be cut by half or down by even 25 percent of what it would normally take."
"A person whom I work with, and is not very technical, found the setup complex, as there are a lot of steps."
"The initial setup is not the straightforward. It took couple of months for us to set up."
"SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite does not have an end user or subscriber console which can show the traffic status."
"When we got SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite (BIS), it was clear that it was going to take more of a technical person. It does take a technically-rooted individual to operate it. It's not something for your everyday guy to do. For what it's doing for us, a dedicated resource is required."
"The ability to bind a mapping to an agreement seems a bit clunky. It would be nice to have a better way of navigating to a map name rather than using a drop down list."
"There might be some improvements they could make to the portal, but they're not anything that stops me from working."
"In some of the other tools out there in the market, you can create one service and use that service without creating a copy. That kind of capability currently doesn't exist in this solution."
More Microsoft Azure API Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
More SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Azure API Management is ranked 1st in API Management with 68 reviews while SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite is ranked 19th in API Management with 37 reviews. Microsoft Azure API Management is rated 7.8, while SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Microsoft Azure API Management writes "Efficiently manages and monetizes API ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite writes "Gives us the flexibility to hook up to systems using any protocol out there". Microsoft Azure API Management is most compared with Amazon API Gateway, Apigee, MuleSoft Anypoint API Manager, Kong Gateway Enterprise and IBM API Connect, whereas SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite is most compared with SAP Cloud Platform, IBM Sterling B2B Integration Services, Mule ESB, IBM B2B Integrator and OpenText Trading Grid. See our Microsoft Azure API Management vs. SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite report.
See our list of best API Management vendors.
We monitor all API Management reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
