We performed a comparison between Magic xpa Application Platform and OutSystems 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."What I found most valuable in the Magic xpa Application Platform is that it has a client-server and web browser technology that's perfect for company users."
"The best feature of Magic is the development time. The time it takes to develop something is incredibly fast if you compare Magic with, for example, Java."
"The solution makes the managing and adapting of the software very easy."
"Magic’s unique approach to development ensures that the programmer stays focused on the objective of the program (i.e. display all customers in California), instead of the repetitive tasks that surround it (i.e. connect to database, open customers table, create the query to retrieve records within the specified criteria, fetch the result of the query, connect it to a data grid, etc.)."
"The ability to use the same development environment for both Windows and Android applications. Magic xpa also supports iOS applications."
"Being able to make changes to existing programs to comply with last minute changes in requirements, and/or being able to fix, test, review, and deploy new code in a manner of hours instead of days, definitely gives us a huge advantage over our competitors and this is only possible thanks to Magic’s speed of programming."
"Without the need to compile code, the time spent in the development cycle is greatly reduced, allowing the programmer to test modifications to a program immediately after they have been saved."
"xpa gives us a fast development speed."
"One thing I like about OutSystems is that there's no lock-in. You can keep running your applications because it's on .NET and hosted centrally. That's one of the advantages I see there in terms of not having an IT strategy that has a dependency on a particular platform."
"The most valuable features of OutSystems are the user-friendly platform. The drag-and-drop feature is great. I have used other rapid application development tools before, but they were not as advanced as OutSystems. With the previous tools, I had to manually build certain features, but OutSystems does it automatically."
"The flow editor is the most valuable feature. It is simple and intuitive, and it can guide you step-by-step."
"It is very stable."
"It provides for faster development and better software releases."
"Reduces the manual labor in compiling and deploying applications and generating procedural code (by reducing development bureaucracy/processes, resulting in real gains). The LifeTime Server approach, requiring just a few steps to publish applications in production environments, is fantastic."
"The solution helps to build mobile and web applications on SOAP and REST. You can integrate it with backend systems by submitting a code."
"Scalability proved to be an exceptionally beneficial feature."
"There is room for improvement in Magic's marketing and licensing. I would like to see more integration of web functionality."
"When you have several tasks, you open a screen in a task in developing mode, and you don't see the parent screens. Debugging lacks the effects to solve problems. You have to do it first in a kind of studio. Then you have to be sure that you can do it in Magic because there is almost nothing to debug it. It's practically impossible to debug. You have to be sure before you put your snippets."
"The user interface could be improved to be more friendly for developers."
"The ability to display page up, page down, top and bottom buttons along the scroll bar would make my mouse-reliant customers happy."
"In the next version of the Magic xpa Application Platform, I want tables or small programs where I can directly add expressions. I can do it on SQL, but it would make life much easier if that specification were added to the platform."
"Throughout my career, I've encountered difficulties when integrating new technologies with Magic xpa Application Platform. In particular, when attempting to incorporate features from other development languages into earlier versions of the solution called uniPaaS. I struggled to integrate .NET components due to the limited options available. This made the process more challenging and complicated. I find it challenging to create a more user-friendly experience for users who may be comparing the system to other systems they have used outside or within the company on different platforms."
"I would like to see a spell checker included with optional language support. Currently, this has to be purchased from a third-party."
"It is missing basic charting tools for bar/pie/series charts. It is left to the developer to acquire and deploy charting tools or the customer to purchase a third-party reporting tool to produce charts."
"We had some lagging issues under high data loads, and the solution needed to be customized to improve this."
"There are many tutorials available but they are very basic and good for learning the platform. To develop an enterprise-grade application, advanced tutorials need to be developed to help IT professionals design/develop high-quality/performance applications."
"It's difficult to do the component version control. I would like them to add more studying materials."
"The integration points need to be increased. People have also started to adopt this solution for their regular needs. That means it's not only the big enterprises that are adopting this solution. There are also small and medium enterprises that are adopting it. I've read that where you have large deployments, OutSystems starts to crumble a bit. That is the idea that no customer would know at the beginning and would also not like to hit the wall there. When it is on the client, there are a lot of applications already on low-code, and then suddenly you realize that you want to do some big applications, and you face hurdles. This is the general feedback for all such platforms."
"While I can't speak to the market impact, as a developer, I've seen significant reductions in development time across different versions of our applications. One area for improvement would be the UI controls in Service Studio. Sometimes, controls don't appear in the IDE, requiring us to check them in the web browser instead. Overall, our experience with OutSystems has been positive, though improvements in UI development would be welcomed."
"The dashboards in OutSystems could improve. There are a lot of tabs in the service center that can be confusing."
"I like the OutSystems platform. I am working on integrating it with another platform using APIs, however, it has proven to be difficult. The main issue I am facing is obtaining authorization tokens as well as access and refresh tokens. It may be due to my lack of knowledge of APIs as it is new to me."
"The technical features are good, but the actual commercialization is out of reach."
More Magic xpa Application Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
Magic xpa Application Platform is ranked 11th in Mobile Development Platforms with 10 reviews while OutSystems is ranked 1st in Mobile Development Platforms with 46 reviews. Magic xpa Application Platform is rated 8.6, while OutSystems is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Magic xpa Application Platform writes "Fast development and user-oriented functionalities, but it needs better .NET integration and a completely different pricing structure". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OutSystems writes "Useful natural speech to algorithm, reliable, and beneficial automatic task". Magic xpa Application Platform is most compared with Microsoft .NET Framework, Mendix and GeneXus, whereas OutSystems is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, Appian, Mendix, ServiceNow and Oracle Application Express (APEX). See our Magic xpa Application Platform vs. OutSystems report.
See our list of best Mobile 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.