Alternatives to Azure API Management logo

Alternatives to Azure API Management

Apigee, Ocelot, Kong, NGINX, and Azure Functions are the most popular alternatives and competitors to Azure API Management.
60
81
+ 1
0

What is Azure API Management and what are its top alternatives?

Today's innovative enterprises are adopting API architectures to accelerate growth. Streamline your work across hybrid and multi-cloud environments with a single place for managing all your APIs.
Azure API Management is a tool in the API Gateway category of a tech stack.

Top Alternatives to Azure API Management

  • Apigee
    Apigee

    API management, design, analytics, and security are at the heart of modern digital architecture. The Apigee intelligent API platform is a complete solution for moving business to the digital world. ...

  • Ocelot
    Ocelot

    It is aimed at people using .NET running a micro services / service oriented architecture that need a unified point of entry into their system. However it will work with anything that speaks HTTP and run on any platform that ASP.NET Core supports. It manipulates the HttpRequest object into a state specified by its configuration until it reaches a request builder middleware where it creates a HttpRequestMessage object which is used to make a request to a downstream service. ...

  • Kong
    Kong

    Kong is a scalable, open source API Layer (also known as an API Gateway, or API Middleware). Kong controls layer 4 and 7 traffic and is extended through Plugins, which provide extra functionality and services beyond the core platform. ...

  • NGINX
    NGINX

    nginx [engine x] is an HTTP and reverse proxy server, as well as a mail proxy server, written by Igor Sysoev. According to Netcraft nginx served or proxied 30.46% of the top million busiest sites in Jan 2018. ...

  • Azure Functions
    Azure Functions

    Azure Functions is an event driven, compute-on-demand experience that extends the existing Azure application platform with capabilities to implement code triggered by events occurring in virtually any Azure or 3rd party service as well as on-premises systems. ...

  • Amazon API Gateway
    Amazon API Gateway

    Amazon API Gateway handles all the tasks involved in accepting and processing up to hundreds of thousands of concurrent API calls, including traffic management, authorization and access control, monitoring, and API version management. ...

  • Ambassador
    Ambassador

    Map services to arbitrary URLs in a single, declarative YAML file. Configure routes with CORS support, circuit breakers, timeouts, and more. Replace your Kubernetes ingress controller. Route gRPC, WebSockets, or HTTP. ...

  • Tyk Cloud
    Tyk Cloud

    Tyk is a leading Open Source API Gateway and Management Platform, featuring an API gateway, analytics, developer portal and dashboard. We power billions of transactions for thousands of innovative organisations. ...

Azure API Management alternatives & related posts

Apigee logo

Apigee

235
686
29
Intelligent and complete API platform
235
686
+ 1
29
PROS OF APIGEE
  • 12
    Highly scalable and secure API Management Platform
  • 6
    Quick jumpstart
  • 5
    Good documentation
  • 3
    Fast and adjustable caching
  • 3
    Easy to use
CONS OF APIGEE
  • 11
    Expensive
  • 1
    Doesn't support hybrid natively

related Apigee posts

Ocelot logo

Ocelot

77
279
2
A modern fast, scalable API gateway built on ASP.NET core
77
279
+ 1
2
PROS OF OCELOT
  • 1
    Straightforward documentation
  • 1
    Simple configuration
CONS OF OCELOT
    Be the first to leave a con

    related Ocelot posts

    Kong logo

    Kong

    657
    1.5K
    139
    Open Source Microservice & API Management Layer
    657
    1.5K
    + 1
    139
    PROS OF KONG
    • 37
      Easy to maintain
    • 32
      Easy to install
    • 26
      Flexible
    • 21
      Great performance
    • 7
      Api blueprint
    • 4
      Custom Plugins
    • 3
      Kubernetes-native
    • 2
      Security
    • 2
      Has a good plugin infrastructure
    • 2
      Agnostic
    • 1
      Load balancing
    • 1
      Documentation is clear
    • 1
      Very customizable
    CONS OF KONG
      Be the first to leave a con

      related Kong posts

      Al Tsang
      Problem/Challenge

      We needed a lightweight and completely customizable #microservices #gateway to be able to generate #JWT and introspect #OAuth2 tokens as well. The #gateway was going to front all #APIs for our single page web app as well as externalized #APIs for our partners.

      Contenders

      We looked at Tyk Cloud and Kong. Kong's plugins are all Lua based and its core is NGINX and OpenResty. Although it's open source, it's not the greatest platform to be able to customize. On top of that enterprise features are paid and expensive. Tyk is Go and the nomenclature used within Tyk like "sessions" was bizarre, and again enterprise features were paid.

      Decision

      We ultimately decided to roll our own using ExpressJS into Express Gateway because the use case for using ExpressJS as an #API #gateway was tried and true, in fact - all the enterprise features that the other two charge for #OAuth2 introspection etc were freely available within ExpressJS middleware.

      Outcome

      We opened source Express Gateway with a core set of plugins and the community started writing their own and could quickly do so by rolling lots of ExpressJS middleware into Express Gateway

      See more
      NGINX logo

      NGINX

      112.9K
      59.7K
      5.5K
      A high performance free open source web server powering busiest sites on the Internet.
      112.9K
      59.7K
      + 1
      5.5K
      PROS OF NGINX
      • 1.4K
        High-performance http server
      • 893
        Performance
      • 730
        Easy to configure
      • 607
        Open source
      • 530
        Load balancer
      • 288
        Free
      • 288
        Scalability
      • 225
        Web server
      • 175
        Simplicity
      • 136
        Easy setup
      • 30
        Content caching
      • 21
        Web Accelerator
      • 15
        Capability
      • 14
        Fast
      • 12
        High-latency
      • 12
        Predictability
      • 8
        Reverse Proxy
      • 7
        The best of them
      • 7
        Supports http/2
      • 5
        Great Community
      • 5
        Lots of Modules
      • 5
        Enterprise version
      • 4
        High perfomance proxy server
      • 3
        Reversy Proxy
      • 3
        Streaming media delivery
      • 3
        Streaming media
      • 3
        Embedded Lua scripting
      • 2
        GRPC-Web
      • 2
        Blash
      • 2
        Lightweight
      • 2
        Fast and easy to set up
      • 2
        Slim
      • 2
        saltstack
      • 1
        Virtual hosting
      • 1
        Narrow focus. Easy to configure. Fast
      • 1
        Along with Redis Cache its the Most superior
      • 1
        Ingress controller
      CONS OF NGINX
      • 10
        Advanced features require subscription

      related NGINX posts

      Recently I have been working on an open source stack to help people consolidate their personal health data in a single database so that AI and analytics apps can be run against it to find personalized treatments. We chose to go with a #containerized approach leveraging Docker #containers with a local development environment setup with Docker Compose and nginx for container routing. For the production environment we chose to pull code from GitHub and build/push images using Jenkins and using Kubernetes to deploy to Amazon EC2.

      We also implemented a dashboard app to handle user authentication/authorization, as well as a custom SSO server that runs on Heroku which allows experts to easily visit more than one instance without having to login repeatedly. The #Backend was implemented using my favorite #Stack which consists of FeathersJS on top of Node.js and ExpressJS with PostgreSQL as the main database. The #Frontend was implemented using React, Redux.js, Semantic UI React and the FeathersJS client. Though testing was light on this project, we chose to use AVA as well as ESLint to keep the codebase clean and consistent.

      See more

      Around the time of their Series A, Pinterest’s stack included Python and Django, with Tornado and Node.js as web servers. Memcached / Membase and Redis handled caching, with RabbitMQ handling queueing. Nginx, HAproxy and Varnish managed static-delivery and load-balancing, with persistent data storage handled by MySQL.

      See more
      Azure Functions logo

      Azure Functions

      782
      689
      62
      Listen and react to events across your stack
      782
      689
      + 1
      62
      PROS OF AZURE FUNCTIONS
      • 14
        Pay only when invoked
      • 11
        Great developer experience for C#
      • 9
        Multiple languages supported
      • 7
        Great debugging support
      • 5
        Can be used as lightweight https service
      • 4
        Easy scalability
      • 3
        WebHooks
      • 3
        Costo
      • 2
        Event driven
      • 2
        Azure component events for Storage, services etc
      • 2
        Poor developer experience for C#
      CONS OF AZURE FUNCTIONS
      • 1
        No persistent (writable) file system available
      • 1
        Poor support for Linux environments
      • 1
        Sporadic server & language runtime issues
      • 1
        Not suited for long-running applications

      related Azure Functions posts

      Kestas Barzdaitis
      Entrepreneur & Engineer · | 16 upvotes · 762K views

      CodeFactor being a #SAAS product, our goal was to run on a cloud-native infrastructure since day one. We wanted to stay product focused, rather than having to work on the infrastructure that supports the application. We needed a cloud-hosting provider that would be reliable, economical and most efficient for our product.

      CodeFactor.io aims to provide an automated and frictionless code review service for software developers. That requires agility, instant provisioning, autoscaling, security, availability and compliance management features. We looked at the top three #IAAS providers that take up the majority of market share: Amazon's Amazon EC2 , Microsoft's Microsoft Azure, and Google Compute Engine.

      AWS has been available since 2006 and has developed the most extensive services ant tools variety at a massive scale. Azure and GCP are about half the AWS age, but also satisfied our technical requirements.

      It is worth noting that even though all three providers support Docker containerization services, GCP has the most robust offering due to their investments in Kubernetes. Also, if you are a Microsoft shop, and develop in .NET - Visual Studio Azure shines at integration there and all your existing .NET code works seamlessly on Azure. All three providers have serverless computing offerings (AWS Lambda, Azure Functions, and Google Cloud Functions). Additionally, all three providers have machine learning tools, but GCP appears to be the most developer-friendly, intuitive and complete when it comes to #Machinelearning and #AI.

      The prices between providers are competitive across the board. For our requirements, AWS would have been the most expensive, GCP the least expensive and Azure was in the middle. Plus, if you #Autoscale frequently with large deltas, note that Azure and GCP have per minute billing, where AWS bills you per hour. We also applied for the #Startup programs with all three providers, and this is where Azure shined. While AWS and GCP for startups would have covered us for about one year of infrastructure costs, Azure Sponsorship would cover about two years of CodeFactor's hosting costs. Moreover, Azure Team was terrific - I felt that they wanted to work with us where for AWS and GCP we were just another startup.

      In summary, we were leaning towards GCP. GCP's advantages in containerization, automation toolset, #Devops mindset, and pricing were the driving factors there. Nevertheless, we could not say no to Azure's financial incentives and a strong sense of partnership and support throughout the process.

      Bottom line is, IAAS offerings with AWS, Azure, and GCP are evolving fast. At CodeFactor, we aim to be platform agnostic where it is practical and retain the flexibility to cherry-pick the best products across providers.

      See more
      Michal Nowak

      In a couple of recent projects we had an opportunity to try out the new Serverless approach to building web applications. It wasn't necessarily a question if we should use any particular vendor but rather "if" we can consider serverless a viable option for building apps. Obviously our goal was also to get a feel for this technology and gain some hands-on experience.

      We did consider AWS Lambda, Firebase from Google as well as Azure Functions. Eventually we went with AWS Lambdas.

      PROS
      • No servers to manage (obviously!)
      • Limited fixed costs – you pay only for used time
      • Automated scaling and balancing
      • Automatic failover (or, at this level of abstraction, no failover problem at all)
      • Security easier to provide and audit
      • Low overhead at the start (with the certain level of knowledge)
      • Short time to market
      • Easy handover - deployment coupled with code
      • Perfect choice for lean startups with fast-paced iterations
      • Augmentation for the classic cloud, server(full) approach
      CONS
      • Not much know-how and best practices available about structuring the code and projects on the market
      • Not suitable for complex business logic due to the risk of producing highly coupled code
      • Cost difficult to estimate (helpful tools: serverlesscalc.com)
      • Difficulty in migration to other platforms (Vendor lock⚠️)
      • Little engineers with experience in serverless on the job market
      • Steep learning curve for engineers without any cloud experience

      More details are on our blog: https://evojam.com/blog/2018/12/5/should-you-go-serverless-meet-the-benefits-and-flaws-of-new-wave-of-cloud-solutions I hope it helps 🙌 & I'm curious of your experiences.

      See more
      Amazon API Gateway logo

      Amazon API Gateway

      1.4K
      1K
      45
      Create, publish, maintain, monitor, and secure APIs at any scale
      1.4K
      1K
      + 1
      45
      PROS OF AMAZON API GATEWAY
      • 37
        AWS Integration
      • 7
        Websockets
      • 1
        Serverless
      CONS OF AMAZON API GATEWAY
      • 2
        No websocket broadcast
      • 1
        Less expensive

      related Amazon API Gateway posts

      A Luthra
      VP Software Engrg at Reliant · | 3 upvotes · 1M views
      Shared insights
      on
      ApigeeApigeeAmazon API GatewayAmazon API Gateway

      Amazon API Gateway vs Apigee. How do they compare as an API Gateway? What is the equivalent functionality, similarities, and differences moving from Apigee API GW to AWS API GW?

      See more
      Ambassador logo

      Ambassador

      77
      187
      4
      Open source, Kubernetes-native API Gateway for Microservices built on Envoy
      77
      187
      + 1
      4
      PROS OF AMBASSADOR
      • 3
        Edge-proxy
      • 1
        Kubernetes friendly configuration
      CONS OF AMBASSADOR
        Be the first to leave a con

        related Ambassador posts

        Tyk Cloud logo

        Tyk Cloud

        52
        94
        31
        Open Source API Management
        52
        94
        + 1
        31
        PROS OF TYK CLOUD
        • 10
          Full featured
        • 5
          Easy to install
        • 5
          Great Performance
        • 4
          Flexible
        • 2
          Easy to use
        • 2
          Better Oauth integration
        • 2
          Good value
        • 1
          Great support & advice
        CONS OF TYK CLOUD
          Be the first to leave a con

          related Tyk Cloud posts

          Al Tsang
          Problem/Challenge

          We needed a lightweight and completely customizable #microservices #gateway to be able to generate #JWT and introspect #OAuth2 tokens as well. The #gateway was going to front all #APIs for our single page web app as well as externalized #APIs for our partners.

          Contenders

          We looked at Tyk Cloud and Kong. Kong's plugins are all Lua based and its core is NGINX and OpenResty. Although it's open source, it's not the greatest platform to be able to customize. On top of that enterprise features are paid and expensive. Tyk is Go and the nomenclature used within Tyk like "sessions" was bizarre, and again enterprise features were paid.

          Decision

          We ultimately decided to roll our own using ExpressJS into Express Gateway because the use case for using ExpressJS as an #API #gateway was tried and true, in fact - all the enterprise features that the other two charge for #OAuth2 introspection etc were freely available within ExpressJS middleware.

          Outcome

          We opened source Express Gateway with a core set of plugins and the community started writing their own and could quickly do so by rolling lots of ExpressJS middleware into Express Gateway

          See more