The Rise and Fall of Postman

Postman began as a simple Chrome extension that made API testing more approachable for developers. Over time it evolved into a full‑blown platform, adding features such as mock servers, automated testing, and a community hub. While the added functionality appealed to large teams, it also introduced new dependencies on Postman’s cloud infrastructure.

Corporate Pressures and the Shift to Cloud

The first noticeable change came with the removal of the offline Scratchpad. Developers found that basic functionality now required syncing to Postman’s cloud, a move that raised concerns for teams working on sensitive data in banking, healthcare, and government sectors. The shift was interpreted by many as a strategy to increase revenue through mandatory cloud usage rather than a purely technical decision.

Similar patterns emerged in other popular tools. Insomnia’s version 8 locked local collections behind a mandatory login, and Thunder Client moved the ability to save requests to local Git repositories to a paid tier. These changes illustrate a broader trend in the API tooling ecosystem: promising products become “en‑shittified” when corporate interests override developer needs.

Performance and Bloat: A Developer’s Pain

Beyond business models, performance has become a critical pain point. The Electron framework, once heralded for its cross‑platform promise, now manifests as sluggishness—Postman can take over ten seconds to launch on a MacBook M1 Pro and consume gigabytes of RAM for a single GET request. The UI has also ballooned, with dozens of menus and pop‑ups designed to promote enterprise features, leaving developers who simply want to ping an endpoint feeling frustrated.

The Emergence of Light‑Weight Alternatives

The frustration has driven a migration toward tools that prioritize simplicity and Git‑centric workflows. Bruno, an open‑source client that stores collections as plain‑text files, has gained traction for its ability to version‑control API tests alongside source code. While Bruno lacks some enterprise features—such as advanced proxy support—and its JavaScript sandbox differs from Postman’s, it represents a step toward respecting the developer’s workflow.

Other contenders include Hurl and Httpie, each occupying a different point on the spectrum between full‑blown platforms and minimalistic utilities. None fully satisfies all needs, but they collectively signal a demand for local‑first, open‑source solutions.

What the Ideal API Tool Looks Like

A consensus view of an ideal client emerges from the community’s pain points:

  • Local‑First, File‑System Centric – Collections stored directly in the project repository.
  • Zero Login Wall – Full functionality without mandatory account creation or cloud sync.
  • Git‑Native Collaboration – Collaboration through standard VCS workflows instead of proprietary cloud services.
  • Native Performance – Built with high‑performance languages (e.g., Rust) to avoid Electron overhead.
  • Extensible Design – A modular plugin architecture that adds features without bloating the core.
  • Universal Imports – Native support for OpenAPI, GraphQL, and Postman collections.
  • Proxy Agnosticism – Ability to route traffic through any interception tool.
  • Scripting & Auth Flows – Pre‑request and post‑response hooks.
  • Straightforward Testing – Built‑in support for writing and running tests against API responses.

These principles reflect a developer‑centric philosophy that balances power with simplicity.

Industry Implications and the Path Forward

The current landscape illustrates a tension between commercial interests and developer autonomy. As large teams increasingly rely on cloud‑based tooling for collaboration and compliance, the risk of vendor lock‑in and performance degradation grows. Conversely, the rise of open‑source, local‑first clients demonstrates that a significant portion of the community values control, speed, and transparency.

The future of API tooling may hinge on finding a middle ground: platforms that offer enterprise‑grade features without sacrificing local performance or imposing mandatory cloud dependencies. Until such solutions materialize, developers will continue to experiment with a mix of heavyweight and lightweight tools, each addressing different aspects of the API development workflow.

Source: https://efpasia.github.io/blog/2025/12/24/api-tooling-crisis/