Paw: The ultimate REST client for Mac

by atombender • 11 years ago

185 113 11 years ago

mattkrea3• 11 years ago

We bought this app and I can safely say this is the best REST client I have ever seen or used.

The others out there (mostly the extensions for Chrome and Firefox) will do for most people but this app is just gorgeous and offers some nice features on top.

Some of the more mundane parts (JSON content in a post, basic headers) are handled in a couple clicks.

I love it.

dozzie3• 11 years ago

How is it better from cURL, Python's liburl2 or libwww-perl?

mattkrea3• 11 years ago

If you are quick with cURL maybe it's not--it's just a matter of preference.

I, on the other hand, can take quite a while to type out a cURL request with 4 custom headers and a long JSON body.

While I spent most of my day at the CLI I do step out for a few choice applications. Being able to quickly save and compile a bunch of requests to replay is also nice though I'm sure you could do that with cURL or similar tools.

It doesn't hurt that the app is particularly nice looking either :-)

lobster_johnson3• 11 years ago

It's not necessarily better, just a different interface that scales better to complex requests.

curl command lines can get huge and unwieldy. If a curl command has a huge amount of input, that gets unwieldy, too. Same thing with data input.

The fact that your requests persist and can be repeated and modified is useful. Better than looking up past commands in ~/.bash_history.

guidedlight• 11 years ago

Yep, loving it too.

Quite a few of the Windows users in my office are jealous of this particular application.

spdustin• 11 years ago

It can generate basic auth headers, handle OAuth workflows, store variables in different "environment" containers per project, export the request in any of a variety of formats (jQuery, curl, etc:) - it's a brilliant piece of software, and I use it almost every day.

lisper2• 11 years ago

Can you automate it? i.e. is it useful for non-interactive work like automatic testing?

seanp2k22• 11 years ago

There are many better ways to do automatic testing. I've never used Paw for that, and I don't think it competes with e.g. postman on that front, if that's what you're asking.

However, for manual testing / having it write curl commands for you / making JSON really easy to work with by hand, it's fantastic, and I've converted a few people at work to it. Developer is also very responsive and nice to work with on Twitter.

Edit: you can also write extensions in JS for it. Not quite as accessible as e.g. Atom, but still decently hackable: https://luckymarmot.com/paw/extensions/

cmelbye• 11 years ago

As the sibling comment says, there are probably better tools for automated testing. However, I haven't dove too deeply into this aspect of Paw, but I know that at the very least there is a "Run All" shortcut which runs all requests you have configured. The sidebar shows which requests succeeded and which failed. There may be some way to automate this. (It apparently supports extensions, if this functionality isn't built-in.)

johns2• 11 years ago

Try Runscope (disc: founder) for that. Paw is my favorite desktop app but we are purpose built for automated testing and monitoring.

a855• 11 years ago

Postman founder here. Postman let's you run tests outside of Postman through the newman tool (free) [1]. Just take collections outside Postman and run them anywhere you want. Collections can have Javascript scripts embedded inside them for request chaining (transferring data from one request to another) or just writing integration tests. Tons of possibilities and we have some great new stuff coming up around this.

[1] http://www.getpostman.com/docs/newman_intro

cwisecarver• 11 years ago

It's excellent. It's worth the money. I didn't even expense it because it was worth my money.

stephenr7• 11 years ago

Not in the MAS? I'm significantly less likely to buy your app.

Edit: apparently it is available via MAS but there is ZERO mention of this on the site (on mobile at least).

lobster_johnson3• 11 years ago

https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/paw-http-rest-client/id58465...

(Not my app, by the way.)

mplewis2• 11 years ago

The Mac App Store sucks for both users and devs. It cripples apps by making it harder for developers to add features.

That said, it is in the Mac App Store.

rimantas2• 11 years ago

As an user I LOVE App Store. Not being on MAS is a significant minus for the app.

liviu• 11 years ago

As an user I love Mac App Store. I can install my apps everywhere with just one click.

themartorana2• 11 years ago

Why? Sandboxing?

After a decade or more of Mac apps working just fine through online sales, what is the driver - what is so significant - that makes you get so upset that it might not be offered on the MAS?

I personally find the move to the MAS a sad development - less $ per sale to the dev, 30% grift from Apple, as if they needed more money, and sandboxing that renders some of the best apps out there less-than-useful. Not to mention Apple's arbitrary approval process that - if nothing else - puts an additional week between me and bug fixes.

I can understand liking the convenience. But what makes it so necessary?

stephenr7• 11 years ago

I can understand liking the convenience. But what makes it so necessary?

I said it makes me significantly less likely to buy it - specifically because of two factors: the convenience, and the security of knowing who is charging my card.

I didn't say "I won't buy this if it isn't in the MAS" - so what part of what I said means the MAS is "necessary"?

I personally find the move to the MAS a sad development -

I didn't say everyone should be forced to use the MAS. Neither did Apple. Nothing stops a developer from releasing their App on their own and via MAS.

less $ per sale to the dev, 30% grift from Apple, as if they needed more money

70% of $40 is less than 100% of $0?

and sandboxing that renders some of the best apps out there less-than-useful.

Not to mention that pesky security it provides for end users.

Seriously, if an app can't operate within the sandboxing of the MAS, its completely reasonable for it to be not sold that way.

This app can operate within a sandbox, so why do you have such a problem with someone else wanting/using a more convenient and secure option?

mcintyre1994• 11 years ago

I absolutely understand why developers don't like it - I wish Apple worked so they did so more stuff would be there. For me it's the sandboxing on small utility apps, and I admit I'll look in the store first. It's just peace of mind really, if an app doesn't need out the sandbox (I acknowledge many many apps do) then I'd rather have it contained.

See flashlight apps with absurd permissions and spyware on Android to see what assholes occasionally do with too many permissions.

rimantas2• 11 years ago

Otoh with MAS you get: hosting, payment processing, easy notification of updates for the users. As a user I love that when I get the new machine I don't need to go hunting for all the apps I own, looking for the download link again, then looking for the serial numbers/licences. I can just go to App Store app and click "Install".

mittsh10• 11 years ago

As lobster_johnson mentioned, Paw is indeed available on the MAS: https://itunes.apple.com/app/paw-http-rest-client/id58465320...

I'm the founder of Paw, and frankly I like the MAS. It gave Paw a lot of visibility without us taking any financial risk. Otherwise, we would have needed to pay for some kind of advertising when we didn't have the money for it. MAS allowed us to bootstrap and gain users.

Sure, the 30% split for Apple sounds like a lot, and it surely is. That's exacly why we encourage users to get Paw from our website (which uses Stripe for CC processing). Also, website purchases get updates a little faster, as it doesn't rely on Apple's approval (which is IMO the real pain point of the MAS).

Lastly, sandboxing isn't an issue at all for us. And the version distributed through the website is also sandboxed. I personally love sandboxing, as a user first, and as a developer too. Sure, some apps (due to their nature) can't work with sandboxing, and should probably be allowed on the MAS as a special exception (the example I have in mind is the excellent Git Tower).

mplewis2• 11 years ago

I use Paw a bunch and I love it.

jinwei• 11 years ago

the logo of Paw is too like Baidu's https://www.baidu.com/

ddoolin3• 11 years ago

A paw print is quite a generic thing and even the shape of the paw itself between the two is made differently. Aside from the general idea of a paw, they don't seem to have anything else in common.

ing33k• 11 years ago

Paw is undoubtedly the best REST client, but that said I am slowly moving away from it as it's not cross platform . I develop both on a Mac and Ubuntu system .

Slowly migrating to Postman https://www.getpostman.com/

vittore• 11 years ago

I am looking at it and can hardly find anything that it has that free POSTMAN doesn't have. I am wondering, anyone who leaving nice comment about Paw, have you used POSTMAN before, if yes, what is it what it miss that justify non cross platform piece of software that you have to pay for?

stephenr7• 11 years ago

Not requiring Chrome is worth $15 alone.

untog• 11 years ago

Only if you're someone that doesn't use Chrome.

pbreit• 11 years ago

There are some benefits to being standalone but I'm not sure if any being a chrome app.

innguest4• 11 years ago

A native GUI? Believe or not people will still pay a premium for that, myself included. There's a lot of money that web app makers are leaving on the table by not making "non cross platform pieces of software".

ddoolin3• 11 years ago

I've been using this for awhile, and I think it's quite pricey for what it does, as Postman is free and offers much of the same functionality. That said, this has a great UI and the grouping feature is awesome for managing multiple projects, and in general it works very well. One of my favorite features is the ability to "turn off" certain parameters but keep them in the request, so you can switch them on/off when you want to change maybe a field or two easily without making an entirely new request.

I really would like to see the ability to type JSON out in the request body manually instead of the somewhat-clunky input field deal.

lowbloodsugar• 11 years ago

Re: JSON: You can: just use the text section. And you can go back and forth: you can type some text, then edit specific fields in the JSON window.

Zombieball2• 11 years ago

Text entry also autocompletes variables and dynamic value function names!

mittsh10• 11 years ago

You can write JSON in the Text field, and it will be syntax colored if you add a "Content-Type: application/json" header. And you can switch back and forth between Text and JSON formats. (I'm a Paw guy)

dorian-graph3• 11 years ago

I had been using Postman[1] for the last year or so and it's recently undergone a big update too which includes syncing. I've just tried Paw and like it more because:

- Native Mac app (it's prettier)

- I like the 3 pane window structure

- A lot of smaller UX things are nicer like duplicating, Postman annoyingly scrolls down, having to explicitly hit save, etc.

- Extensions

- Dynamic values

- Completions

Postman has the following which Paw lacks AFAIK:

- Collection automation and testing

- Chrome integration

- Dark UI theme

If I had use either of the 2 above I would not be able to switch over to Paw.

[1] https://www.getpostman.com/

ddoolin3• 11 years ago

On Macs I would consider the Chrome integration to be a down side as it seems to install itself as a separate application entirely, and thus in my app launcher (which annoys me, especially when I'm signed into Chrome + Canary and then it's showing up twice).

dorian-graph3• 11 years ago

When you Command+Tab to it it raises the main Chrome window too which is annoying.

The positive side is the capturing of HTTP requests in Chrome.

developer1• 11 years ago

To expand on the point "Chrome integration", the most useful aspect of Postman is the "Postman Interceptor". You can clone any real in-browser request (primary page or ajax request) into Postman, ready to be replayed or modified then replayed. The amount of time saved when you're playing with ajax requests rather than a REST API is insane.

Zombieball2• 11 years ago

I switched from Postman to Paw primarily because the JSON pretty print functionality in postman couldn't handle very large JSON responses.

akhilcacharya• 11 years ago

I just discovered PAW yesterday. Its already my favorite Mac app. Absolutely wonderful!

jaaron• 11 years ago

I'm actually surprised by how positive the responses are for this app.

First, I'm a bit turned off by it's use of the term REST. It's just an HTTP client. Gah, I give up.

I occasionally use postman, but more likely I'm writing a script that I'm going to integrate into my automated testing anyway. Or a simple one-off script with wget. I find that faster to use than a GUI but maybe I'm just getting too settled in my ways.

What was the use case that made you switch to something like this?

awinder• 11 years ago

Repeated manual testing of APIs at work across different environments. I used to just keep a scratch pad but with paw we were able to set it up and distribute a save file over Dropbox for the team to share. Variables for different environments were a nice touch, I guess you could bash script to your hearts content but this was a little less cumbersome.

coldtea9• 11 years ago

First, I'm a bit turned off by it's use of the term REST. It's just an HTTP client.

And REST is just an HTTP based architecture.

pornel• 11 years ago

REST, in the form coined by Roy Fielding, is actually almost the opposite of what "RESTful" means today, e.g.

A REST API should not be dependent on any single communication protocol

http://roy.gbiv.com/untangled/2008/rest-apis-must-be-hyperte...

mittsh10• 11 years ago

To be very accurate, REST isn't necessarily based on HTTP. But we like to see "REST" or "RESTful" as the type of HTTP APIs we almost all build nowadays as opposed to other protocols built on top of HTTP like SOAP. (Frankly, who builds non-HTTP REST stuff?!)

Disclaimer: I'm a Paw guy (founder).

a855• 11 years ago

Postman let's you do both. Use the GUI for explornig the API and use the CLI (newman[1]) for integrating with automated build systems. The idea is that you should not have to repeat yourself at any point in your workflow.

1: http://www.getpostman.com/docs/newman_intro

Lukeas14• 11 years ago

Working on a project at work that's got about 50+ endpoints all saved in a single paw file. Paw makes it stupidly simple to go back to any of them. It also remembers headers and POST request bodies which saves a ton of time. Just found out in this thread that you can distribute paw files to the rest of your team to use. Should be onboarding new developers much easier.

connor4312• 11 years ago

I've tried to use both Paw and Postman. Always ended up going back to HTTPie (https://github.com/jakubroztocil/httpie). It's much faster than clicking through a GUI, at least for basic requests (which is what 95% of requests are).

Don't get me wrong, Paw is a really nice app, but I don't feel that it rivals the productivity of bash-jitsu for most day-to-day use.

webXL• 11 years ago

After trying to figure out why Postman was doing a double GET this morning on a coworker's computer, I finally told him to just install httpie. Took a little while but it's much easier to be explicit about a request. Bash command history does a lot of what these GUIs do.

krat0sprakhar• 11 years ago

You probably wanna tell the Postman team[0] about this. They are a bunch of helpful folks who are working very hard on building the product. They'll be glad to see the bug report.

Full disclosure: I interned with Postman for a short duration last year.

[0] https://twitter.com/postmanclient

loevborg• 11 years ago

Maybe it was actually an OPTION/GET combination? In that case, it's actually useful that Postman is running in Chrome because it shares the same environment and constraints.

a855• 11 years ago

You can ping me at @postmanclient or email me at abhinav[at]getpostman.com. Would help in figuring this out.

barbs• 11 years ago

I find the Collections feature in Postman to be really helpful. Is there a similar feature in Httpie? I couldn't see anything on the github README.

mittsh10• 11 years ago

HTTPie is a CLI client, and I don't think it would make sense for it to save the requests you make (as opposed to a GUI). Though, it has a nice persistence feature with sessions (https://github.com/jakubroztocil/httpie#sessions).

It's the nice thing with GUIs (Paw, Postman...)! Paw saves all your work in ".paw" documents that you can share with your team on Dropbox or Git. You can have many documents, and organize your API calls.

Disclaimer: I'm the founder of Paw.

davelnewton• 11 years ago

I didn't know this existed; my curl-fu is weak--this will come in extremely handy. Combined w/ jq this is a new tool in my daily workflow. Thanks!

msoad• 11 years ago

This should have Swagger import!

lobster_johnson3• 11 years ago

It does: https://luckymarmot.com/paw/extensions/SwaggerImporter.

morgante• 11 years ago

I downloaded the trial, but unfortunately it seems to be extremely buggy. I'll stick with Postman.

mittsh10• 11 years ago

Sorry for the trouble :( If you can, we'd love to hear more details about the bugs you had. You can contact us via our support page: https://luckymarmot.com/paw/support Thanks a lot!

tbrock• 11 years ago

I wish you could send a request by hitting the enter key in paw. I seem to remember that not being possible.

frenchie4111• 11 years ago

You have to do Cmd + Enter to send the current request

dorian-graph3• 11 years ago

For the record, this is also common behaviour in other apps on Mac.

MichaelCrawford• 11 years ago

There is an elementary particle physics program produced by CERN called PAW, for Physics Analysis Workstation.

In my honest opinion, it is the very worst computer program to have ever walked the earth.

mittsh10• 11 years ago

Yeah, there are a couple of homonyms :) Didn't know that CERN project, though. We try to spell Paw (capitalized P) as it isn't an acronym.

westoque2• 11 years ago

I think $30 for REST client is a bit too much since there are many free alternatives.

coldtea9• 11 years ago

It's for professionals where $30 is both nothing and tax-deductible.

westoque2• 11 years ago

I'm pretty sure professionals would think $30 IS something. It sure is to me!

thebouv• 11 years ago

I work in a huge company and $30 is still considered something.

ChrisLTD• 11 years ago

Agreed. If it saves you ~30 minutes of time, it's likely worth the $30 unless you're undercharging.

Cakez0r• 11 years ago

There is only really one free alternative with a comparable feature set - Postman. Postman is pretty good, but I would pay that and more for a decent (windows) alternative.

brainburn• 11 years ago

Somehow it does not understand what to do with my https://mydomain.io/blah url, it tries to fetch https://mydomain.io%0A/blah%0A

Postman has no problems with it though :)

vermooten• 11 years ago

DHC anyone?

adam-a• 11 years ago

I use DHC and like it a lot. I tried a bunch of the other Chrome based HTTP testers and found it to be the easiest and neatest one. I haven't tried Postman yet though.

It would be nice if there was a way for it to tell I have donated though and stop bugging me.

tempodox• 11 years ago

Might be nice. However, I do not find video an acceptable medium for a tutorial or documentation. Might be easier to make than a written doc, but so much harder for the recipient to get value out of.

sul4bh• 11 years ago

The most useful feature for me is 'dynamic variables'. I can use data value from a HTTP response as a variable in the request body for another HTTP request. It makes testing API endpoints that depend on each other a breeze.

I also like the 'environment variable' feature. I can easy test the API locally and on staging server just by changing setting different environments.

mittsh10• 11 years ago

Thanks! I'm the guy behind Paw, and I must say the Dynamic Values are our kind of secret sauce :) it's just one piece of the app, but it's what allows you to do pretty much whatever you want. Extensions are also nice, as they allow you to add new features yourself: https://luckymarmot.com/paw/extensions/

quicksnap• 11 years ago

I normally use Postman, and the one feature that turns me off right now is the inability to import from a URL. Specifically, Swagger.

Postman has these type of import options: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/spa/4moihw0kt47f2sy/lona1q...

I also tried saving my Swagger JSON spec to a file and importing it via the Swagger Importer, but it failed. =\

Otherwise, it seems gorgeous!

mittsh10• 11 years ago

Hey, are you using that Swagger Importer? https://luckymarmot.com/paw/extensions/SwaggerImporter If it fails, I'm happy to help. Can you share with us the Swagger file you're trying to import (support@luckymarmot.com)? Will be happy to help. (I'm the Paw founder)

Paw: The ultimate REST client for Mac

Related Stories