Apica Ascent Telemetry Data Management Platform

I use Apica for performance testing, where I record our flows, enhance our scripts, and add inline code and correlation IDs. This provides dynamic values for execution. I use Apica for automation testing as well.

Apica allows me to record APIs easily and enhances scripts through options like auto-correlation, enabling me to access dynamic fields. The tool has a test analyzer for clear reporting and downloading PDF reports. It is useful for both performance and automation testing, facilitating access to headers and payloads easily, enhancing scripts with dynamic values.

Apica cannot perform endurance or scale-up tests independently. It requires other tools like ALM. When editing scripts, only one can be accessed at a time, risking changes affecting other folders. The scripting language used is outdated, similar to Cobol.

I have been using Apica for the past year.

Apica is a stable product with no reported breakdowns or bugs.

Apica is scalable. I can add numerous scripts and perform enhancements. I have 200 scripts in my test folder, which can be easily accessed.

I contacted Apica's support for a colleague's access permission issue, which was resolved by addressing her access permissions.

Negative

The setup was very easy for me. I grasped everything within a month or quicker.

Alternatives to Apica in our organization include JMeter and LoadRunner. I chose Apica for its ease of recording complex web application flows and file uploads without needing additional tools like proxy enablement.

I find Apica challenging to learn initially due to the lack of online training resources besides documentation. It's essential for someone knowledgeable to provide KT sessions. Overall, I rate Apica a six out of ten. Its ease of enhancement once I know the tool, despite some access and learning limitations. 

I've been using Apica for performance testing, scripting our commission, and executions. The platform generally allows you to perform all performance testing cycles.

Anyone can understand the solution easily because it doesn't require a specific scripted language. Everything is on the graphic user interface. You can just click on what you want and proceed. That's the best part. Apica is very user-friendly and has the best GUI compared to other products.

Apica is costly, and there's no way to test mobile applications through Apica. You can test mobile applications through other platforms. However, Apica is only for APIs and applications.

I have been using Apica for almost two years.

I haven't faced any major breakdowns or stability issues with the solution. Apica has been consistent. Apica has around twelve powerful data centers worldwide, and I don't remember experiencing any hard blows.

The solution lets you have multiple virtual users. Although Apica claims to support millions of users, we haven't needed to scale to that level. We did not experience anything negative regarding the solution's scalability.

Apica's technical support team is really fast and supportive. The solution was not picking up some scripts when we wanted multiple scripts for execution. We had 40 executable scripts, and the Apica portal was not picking some of them, leaving behind five or six of them. We had to reach out to their technical support team. They set up a working session with us and helped us resolve the issue quickly.

Positive

Setting up and configuring tests in Apica is easier than with any other tool I have experienced. It's really easy to understand for someone with no performance testing background. Understanding and using Apica is as simple as using any social media platform.

I know Apica is an expensive solution, but it is worth the money for the service it provides.

For API, you usually have to pick the payload, like the role code. There's a place where you can paste it, and it delivers the results. The results are very clear to understand. You can use the solution to test all the APIs or any applications easily.

You can easily perform all the performance testing cycles on Apica, including script recording, script validations, script correlations, and parameterization. For correlation, you can easily correlate dynamic values by just picking up left boundaries and right boundaries to find and correlate them. The solution also facilitates the automatic parameterization of values. It's not complicated, and Apica has made it as simple as using any social media platform.

I would recommend the solution to other users.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

We use the tool for automation. We have applications that need continuous monitoring. So, we use Apica for it.

It is easy to create scripts. We don't have to write any script. Ready-made options are available. We can select, drag, and drop the options, and the script is ready. The solution’s real-time monitoring features have had a huge impact on our service delivery.

If we have an application and the script for it, we keep monitoring it. When the script goes red, it indicates that something is not working. So, we check and analyze the applications. We keep track of applications and monitor whether they are live or not. The tool is also useful for monitoring cloud services.

ZebraTester must be improved. I did not find much information on it. It is difficult to create a script using ZebraTester. There must be a better way to create scripts in ZebraTester. The ZebraTester framework is jumbled. There must be better documentation on it.

Apica is a stable product. We used to have issues before when we did data center testing, but it's stable now. More than 30 to 40 teams are using Apica in our organization.

The product is scalable. It provides group-based access. We can create a group and then give them access.

I contacted support when I had to create some scripts for external applications. The support is helpful.

The setup and deployment were easy.

We chose Apica because we required a solution for continuous monitoring. The systems have to be stable. The scripts must run 24/7 and show whether the application is available. I will recommend Apica to others. It is a good tool.

Apica does not need any prerequisites. We must know some JavaScript functions. If we know what kind of events are happening, we can make the selections based on them. The product is easy to learn for a beginner. Overall, I rate the product an eight out of ten.

I used the solution in my last project for performance testing to push the load. It is a load generator tool. It is a cluster-based application. When we have to push a lot of loads, we need not worry about the instance count and how it will be handled. If the load generator engine is across the world, we can populate the load based on the region. We can push loads from specific regions.

The solution captures all our requests and responses. For example, if I execute a flow and capture multiple APIs, the product will capture all the APIs and get us a payload. It is easy to find out where I need the parameterization and correlation. With JMeter, I need to maintain the files and record the sessions. ZebraTester is easier. We do the flow and capture it. We can take it up whenever we want. Saving the scripts is also easy. Capturing sessions is a good feature. The entire sessions are saved. I can easily find the details I need.

We use ZebraTester to build scripts. ZebraTester is a bit complicated compared to LoadRunner’s VuGen. Initially, parameterization and correlation activity are somewhat difficult to do with a new tool. Once we get used to it, it's easy to build the scripts. The tool does not provide automatic correlation features. However, LoadRunner does. It finds out the dynamic values in the script and helps us to do the auto-correlation. It would be helpful if Apica could provide such features.

I have been using the solution for two years.

I used to face issues with the scripting parameters. I contacted Apica’s team members, and they helped me resolve the issue. The product is not much user friendly compared to other tools. There are not many articles on Google. Usually, when we face issues, we find the answer on Google. However, with Apica, it is really tough. Apica provides some documentation that gives us an idea of how to proceed, but sometimes, we cannot find the solution for lags. We have to reach out to Apica’s team to find a solution. I rate the stability a five to six out of ten.

The biggest advantage of Apica is that it is completely cluster-based. I need not worry about the number of users. It’s completely cloud-based. Even if I add more users, it will scale up automatically. Apica’s team will handle it. I do not have to worry about the machines. I rate the scalability a ten out of ten.

The technical team is really good. The support personnel are approachable. We can reach them easily. They spend a substantial amount of time resolving our issues. I have connected with them around four times for script issues. They are good to interact with and take time to explain even simple questions.

Positive

The product is deployed on the cloud. If I have three different scripts, I must upload them, align the user, and select the cluster. The initial setup is a bit complicated. The vendor has come up with some new scenarios. I can upload the scripts and create scenarios like in LoadRunner. I can trigger the test with one click. When we have different types of load testing, like step scaling or scalability tests, it is easy to create scenarios in Apica.

With Apica, we must ensure whether the cluster is available or not. If it is not available, the entire scenario will drop. It is a disadvantage. Once everything is available, creating scenarios and integrating them is easy. It will take a few minutes to set up and execute. The setup is pretty straightforward.

The product is less expensive compared to LoadRunner.

LoadRunner and JMeter are the tool’s competitors. Apica can push a lot of load compared to LoadRunner and JMeter. Apica is sufficient for my application. LoadRunner provides a grouping method.

I will recommend the tool to others. Apica is good for API testing. It is suitable for performing extreme stress tests on applications. If we want to play around with the load and do performance testing, Apica is the perfect solution. Overall, I rate the tool an eight out of ten.

I use the solution in my company for performance testing. As the tool is useful for performance testing, it is maintained in the cloud environment.

The product is useful to check the performance of applications and our company also integrates it with other tools since we have a good bandwidth as well. The tool is useful in areas associated with server-side metrics and client-side metrics. When you talk about the client-side metrics, the tool gathers information like whether it has a 90 percent response time and the average response time.

Compared to NeoLoad, JMeter, and LoadRunner, Apica offers many features. With Apica, our company gets to use some direct options. My company is planning to use the same features from Apica in other tools like NeoLoad or JMeter. It takes time when using the functionalities available in Apica in products like NeoLoad or JMeter. It is very easy in Apica to take care of the scripting and adding the input files.

At the moment, Apica is fine, and our company has not faced any issues with the tool. There are some kinds of improvements needed in the product. If you are adding any input file, the tool fails to capture the path. How to work in the scripts and update the path takes time, making it an area where improvements are required.

I have been using Apica for two and a half to three years. I am a user of Apica.

In Apica, once you are done with the scripting, you need to upload them into ALT. Generally, if you have around 100 or 200 scripts, sometimes it won't be able to capture all the scripts. My company has reported the aforementioned issue many times to Apica's vendor, but they have not been able to provide us with a proper solution. In our company, we work with around 200 web applications, and in some applications, we have more than 100 to 200 scripts. Though the 200 scripts get uploaded in ALT, the problems stem from the fact that Apica is not able to capture all the scripts.

It is a good solution in terms of scalability.

Most of the people in my company use Apica for different projects. In my team, around thirty people use the product for performance testing. Around ten people use Apica's synthetic monitoring capabilities.

My company has contacted Apica's support team to notify them about the issue related to the product not being able to capture all the scripts. Though my company does consult the product's support team by scheduling the issues, the response provided by Apica does not match up with our expectations. My company has received a support email address from Apica, which is made exclusively available for my organization, and so we use it to contact the support team.

Previously, my company used LoadRunner.

Speaking about the setup phase, my company has integrated Apica with ZAPTEST. If you want to add any tools related to load testing, we can easily do so without any difficulty.

The solution is deployed on the cloud.

Though I am unsure about the exact price of the product, I am sure that Apica's price will be lower than LoadRunner.

In Apica, debugging and other such areas are easy.

I would definitely recommend the product to those who plan to use it. Compared to the other tools in the market, Apica reduces the work time associated with scripting.

It is easy for beginners to learn and use Apica. With every tool, the concept remains the same, but the implementation may differ. With Apica, everything is easy to learn and implement.

Considering that it is a tool that makes it easy for everyone to deal with scripting, and since it reduces the manual effort required, I rate the tool an eight out of ten.