Amazon API Gateway vs. Apache HTTP Server

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Amazon API Gateway
Score 7.6 out of 10
N/A
AWS offers the Amazon API Gateway supports the creation and publication of an API for web applications, as well as its monitoring and maintenance. The Amazon API Gateway is able to support thousands of API calls concurrently and provides traffic management, as well as monitoring and access control.
$0.90
Per Million
Apache HTTP Server
Score 9.1 out of 10
N/A
Apache Web Server (Apache HTTP Server) is an open source HTTP web server for modern operating systems including UNIX and Windows.N/A
Pricing
Amazon API GatewayApache HTTP Server
Editions & Modules
Past 300 Million
$0.90
Per Million
First 300 Million
$1.00
Per Million
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Amazon API GatewayApache HTTP Server
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Amazon API GatewayApache HTTP Server
Features
Amazon API GatewayApache HTTP Server
API Management
Comparison of API Management features of Product A and Product B
Amazon API Gateway
9.1
14 Ratings
8% above category average
Apache HTTP Server
-
Ratings
API access control9.013 Ratings00 Ratings
Rate limits and usage policies10.013 Ratings00 Ratings
API usage data8.013 Ratings00 Ratings
API user onboarding8.013 Ratings00 Ratings
API versioning9.013 Ratings00 Ratings
Usage billing and payments10.012 Ratings00 Ratings
API monitoring and logging10.014 Ratings00 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Amazon API GatewayApache HTTP Server
Small Businesses
NGINX
NGINX
Score 9.2 out of 10
NGINX
NGINX
Score 9.2 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
NGINX
NGINX
Score 9.2 out of 10
NGINX
NGINX
Score 9.2 out of 10
Enterprises
NGINX
NGINX
Score 9.2 out of 10
NGINX
NGINX
Score 9.2 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Amazon API GatewayApache HTTP Server
Likelihood to Recommend
8.0
(14 ratings)
8.0
(20 ratings)
Usability
9.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
10.0
(1 ratings)
9.3
(2 ratings)
User Testimonials
Amazon API GatewayApache HTTP Server
Likelihood to Recommend
Amazon AWS
Experienced a lack of available programming languages while working on a minor project. I had to halt the project and wait for it to be added later. It took ages and had a hit on our productivity. It has a centralized management system which helps and an easy interface which helps to manage multiple tasks in case of large-scale operations and projects.
Read full review
Apache
As I mentioned earlier, the Apache HTTP Server has a small disadvantage compared to the competition (NGINX) in terms of performance. If you run websites that really have a lot of visitors, NGINX might be the better alternative.
On the other hand, the Apache HTTP Server is open source and free. Further functionalities can be activated via modules. The documentation is really excellent.
Read full review
Pros
Amazon AWS
  • API Gateway integrates well with AWS Lambda. This allows us to build a web server in the language and framework of our choice, deploy it as a Lambda function, and expose it through API Gateway.
  • API Gateway manages API keys. Building rate limiting and request quota features are not trivial (or interesting).
  • API Gateway's pricing can be very attractive for services that are accessed infrequently.
Read full review
Apache
  • Street Cred: Apache Web Server is the Founder for all of Apache Foundation's other projects. Without the Web Server, Apache Foundation would look very different. That being said, they have done a good job of maintaining the code base, and keeping a lot of what makes Apache so special
  • Stability: Apache is rock-solid. While no software is perfect, Apache can parse your web sources quickly and cleanly.
  • Flexibility: Need to startup your own Webpage? Done. Wordpress? Yup. REST Endpoint? Check. Honeypot? Absolutely.
Read full review
Cons
Amazon AWS
  • Client certificates are troublesome when trying to attach them to API GW stages.
  • Debugging across several services can be difficult when API GW is integrated with Route 53 and another service like Lambda or EC2/ELB.
  • Creating internal/private APIs, particularly with custom domains, can be unintuitive.
Read full review
Apache
  • The default configurations which comes with Apache server needs to get optimized for performance and security with every new installation as these defaults are not recommended to push on the production environment directly.
  • Security options and advanced configurations are not easy to set up and require an additional level of expertise.
  • Admin frontend GUI could be improved to a great extent to match with other enterprise tools available to serve similar requirements.
Read full review
Usability
Amazon AWS
It is a great product very reliable and stable for connecting various aws services like we connected with lambda function and it is working very well, never faced any issue after the setup. It also saves out lots of money as well as time after we implemented the automatic ec2 server recovery system
Read full review
Apache
No answers on this topic
Support Rating
Amazon AWS
We always had a great experience with the AWS support team. They were always on time and very dependable. It was a good partnership while we worked to resolve our issues.
Read full review
Apache
I give this rating because there is so much Apache documentation and information on the web that you can literally do anything. This has to do with the fact that there is a huge Open Source community that is beyond mature and perhaps one of the most helpful to be found. The only thing that should hold anyone back from anything is that they can not read. RTFM, my friend. And I must say that the manual is excellent.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
Amazon AWS
When we tested Azure API Management at the time, it had serious connectivity issues, it was very unstable, and it needed to do a lot using the command line. Comparing with the AWS solution, which was more mature, and the fact that we have services in use on AWS, we ended up choosing to continue using AWS products. This so as not to run the risk of increasing latency in accesses, and of some functionality not working, due to being developed yet.
Read full review
Apache
I has a lot more features, except that IIS is more integrated in a Windows environment. But now with .net core also possible from Apache it would work anywhere really. Only in a full Windows environment where full integration is needed I would chose to go for IIS. Otherwise Apache it is.
Read full review
Return on Investment
Amazon AWS
  • ROI is negative, you need either to hire them to work with you or spend days/weeks to figure out issues.
  • For some of the projects in the end it is not worth it, it is just a "buzz" to use serverless but not practical.
  • Service is easy to set up authorization and it is easy to manage.
Read full review
Apache
  • Works as intended, so it's less to worry about.
  • Works great on elastic environments (like EC2).
  • As an Open Source project, you can get support for almost any problem you can have.
  • Configuration files, while powerful, can be tricky to dominate for some.
Read full review
ScreenShots