We performed a comparison between GeneXus and Mendix based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Mobile Development Platforms solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."I find the implementation process of GeneXus to be easy."
"With GeneXus, we can create logical representations of transactions in the form of objects."
"It is fast in creating systems and connects to the database quickly."
"This solution works extremely quickly in terms of enabling an application in a production environment."
"I like the testing models, which allow me to create unit or interface tests of my programs. It helps us avoid missed deadlines because we can detect all the errors before deploying the new versions of the solution. And I also like the integration with coding managers like DevOps or Jenkins. It enables us to do versioning."
"The most valuable feature is that GeneXus works with several languages. It's possible to develop chatbots and other functionalities."
"In Knowledge Base, being able to model the workflow before developing the screens is great. We first work with the tables or the transactions using GeneXus and then we work on the screens."
"The solution provides ease of programming and the speed of delivery of demands."
"Mendix code and coding logic are very visual. It looks like a flow chart rather than lines of code. Rapid development is what drew us to Mendix."
"It is stable."
"We find it intuitive and easy to use."
"They are leading in the smart manufacturing, and connectivity space."
"The integrated security saves a lot of time, especially when it comes to setting up user-roles and security. Also, database updates work automatically. There is no need to write queries to update the database, once you make an update."
"The initial setup is easy."
"What I found most valuable in Mendix is that it's very much suitable for mobile apps such as native Android or IOS supported mobile apps. The multiple features of the platform are very, very attractive and very popular. Mendix has technical features such as microflows and nanoflows. You can also access data models in the platform. These are the features that are very, very strong in Mendix. I got my hands dirty on other low-code platforms, but I have not seen such strong features in them compared to the microflows, nanoflows, and data model access that are in Mendix, including creating and integration. The platform has out-of-the-box adapters or out-of-the-box-connectors that you can integrate with different interface applications such as SAP, Salesforce, Oracle EBS, etc."
"I think that the workflow and automation features are quite good."
"We would like to see more extensions and more user controls added to the front-end of this solution, in order to help developers manage the website."
"The front-end with GeneXus is not as good as the back-end."
"It would be better if GeneXus had a wiki. The developer needs some experience to work with the tools. It would be better if they could improve the community. If we have some problem, I open a ticket that takes us to a board, and I have to describe my issue in detail. If the tools have a general community for us to explore with some videos or some articles, I think that that may help the developer."
"I told them to add something about Angular. They're already working on adding it."
"The graphical interface could be improved. I also notice some performance problems on hardware that should be more than adequate. GeneXus uses a lot of RAM and other computer resources."
"It's expensive for a company."
"Documentation is always an issue. In order to develop with GeneXus, there is very little documentation. The documentation is not clear enough in order to develop a great tool."
"GeneXus's user interface has room for improvement."
"You need experienced programmers and developers to understand this solution."
"Mendix is great for internal applications but not so great for a public-facing interface. It lacks a proper directory structure for public use. The URL will not change from page to page unless a deep link is created for each page. That makes it difficult to bookmark pages in the browser to view later on."
"Mendix could improve by allowing the customization of different programming languages, such as Python and C++."
"There is always a layer of custom code required."
"A constraint of Mendix is that you have to look for the required plugins which takes up development time. There are a limited number of Mendix experts in the market."
"One area for improvement is its integration capabilities. Creating a pluggable widget or integrating it with other systems is challenging. In terms of features, it would be great to see advancements such as AI services and the integration of third-party services. Additionally, connecting external devices to the application requires multiple steps. Improving this will make it easier for the developers."
"Mendix is slightly less scalable than I'd like."
"I would like to see more documentation as well as how-to documents."
GeneXus is ranked 8th in Mobile Development Platforms with 13 reviews while Mendix is ranked 2nd in Mobile Development Platforms with 48 reviews. GeneXus is rated 8.6, while Mendix is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of GeneXus writes "Fast, stable, and allows us to model a workflow before developing the screens". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Mendix writes "Low-code, helpful support, and great native mobile capability". GeneXus is most compared with Oracle Application Express (APEX), Microsoft Power Apps, OutSystems and Magic xpa Application Platform, whereas Mendix is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, OutSystems, Appian, Oracle Application Express (APEX) and ServiceNow. See our GeneXus vs. Mendix report.
See our list of best Mobile Development Platforms vendors and best Low-Code Development Platforms vendors.
We monitor all Mobile Development Platforms reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.