Skip to main content

Should Cloud APIs Focus on Client Libraries More Than Endpoints?

Cloud APIs are all about the endpoints: some services follow the current trend of providing a RESTful end point, others use older protocols such as RPC or SOAP, some use newer – push focused – endpoints like WebSockets or HTTP Streaming, others may offer a number of different endpoints to meet different requirements and some just use what seems to be best for a specific job which might mean not strictly following protocol rules. But is providing an endpoint to a service alone good enough? Should a developer really have to care about how a service is built or accessed when they can use a client library?
This post was very much inspired by William Vambenepe’s blog post called Cloud APIs are like military parades which focuses on the current trend of REST APIs but it also covers some interesting questions and one very key one:
How many developers actually directly access an endpoint and how many access a service through a library?
So, should cloud services just be providing endpoints and relying on community, open source and developers to build libraries that make access to their service easier? Should they just provide samples or small helper libraries? Or should a library be provide by the cloud service vendor and be considered a key part of that service?
There may not be right or wrong answers to these question, it may very well depend on the complexity involved in using the service API.
A look at the all time most popular APIs used by mashups in our API directory unsurprisingly lists Google Maps, Flickr, YouTube, Twitter, Amazon and Facebook. The most popular mashups listing also confirms this with a heavy focus on the mashups using mapping APIs.
Mapping APIs are quite complex due to the UI aspect of the service and the majority of libraries are provided by the cloud service vendor. Twitter has developed a large array of libraries built by an “ecosystem” of developers, Facebook provides a suite of SDKs and Tools, Flickr provides API Kits, the YouTube API consists of libraries for visual-oriented functionality and raw access to a data API and finally Amazon offer SDKs for access to AWS APIs and provide code samples for accessing their product advertising one.
Big cloud API players are clearly making an effort to give developers a running start when using their APIs. In the majority of cases some raw API access is available but samples, SDKs and libraries can be found in abundance and have quite frequently been developed by the company itself.
So, do cloud services offer API endpoints just to meet the needs of a very small percentage of developers who want to make raw calls to an API? Do they do it in order to enforce good development practice? Or is the main benefit that it encourages developers and open source advocates to get involved with a service and built a community? What do you think?

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Top 5 Women Who Impacted Technology in 2010

Katie Stanton, International Strategist for Twitter Katie Stanton has impressively long names of companies in her resume. They include the White House, Google Inc, and her latest addition is Twitter. Her remit is working on Twitter’s international strategy and her experience in social media will be a key asset to the company. Katie has a history of working in technology, and her knowledge of departmental laws will help Twitter work alongside government agencies, as she’ll be spearheading the free information approach, especially after the Wikileaks incident. Stanton has been a key player in the techsphere for some time, and this extends to her private life. Following the Haiti disaster she worked with a group of engineers to create a free texting service to help those in need and she is constantly in demand as an expert in both social media and government policy.
Caterina Fake, Co-Founder of Flickr and Hunch Despite having a surname which sounds like a pseudonym for a spy (it’…

Evolution Of Computer Virus [infographic]

AT&T MiFi 2372 review

In the week or so that I have been testing the AT&T MiFi 2372 by Novatel Wireless, it has already saved no less than three lives. First, it saved my cable guy’s life. You see, Time Warner Cable provides the worst home Internet service I have ever experienced. I can’t even think of a close second. If providing terrible home Internet service was a sport, Time Warner Cable would be on its tenth consecutive undefeated season. Forget the fact that my upload speed is capped at 60Kbps and I’m lucky if I can get half that — it has been months since I’ve gone through a full day without at least one service interruption. Months. Unfortunately, Time Warner Cable has an exclusive contract with my building so I have no choice but to endure its abysmal service. Last week, as a Time Warner Cable technician entered my home for the sixth time in two months, I realized that this certainly would have spelled serious trouble had it not been for my trusty new back up device. Before the Mi…