We performed a comparison between Ionic and Magic xpa Application Platform 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."The solution is secure, reliable, and packed with features so we can easily implement apps even in the most complex situations."
"Ionic's best features are its hybrid app development, design, and tags."
"What I like the most about Ionic is live reloading, which enables us to develop new features without having to build the application again and re-check the functionality."
"Ionic is easy to upgrade and is helpful for design purposes. It also is quite common and easy to use. It is a very reliable application. It's easy to write on and print. The UI is easy to use as well. My organization chose to go with Ionic because we can access both Android and iOS applications."
"With the Capacitor feature, you have access to the native attributes of your phone such as your camera. This makes work a lot easier."
"Ionic's best feature is that it's not necessary to write your own custom codes as all the hybrid is provided by Angular."
"The main value of this solution for our business, is that it is a hybrid product that allows us to write code that is compatible with IOS, Android, and web documents."
"Being able to have one set of code is valuable. I don't have to recode for different platforms. I don't have to recode for Xcode, Angular, or Android. So, the biggest feature for me is that it's a hybrid system, and I can have one set of code, and then the tool sets that are in there convert my code for Xcode or Play Store. It makes work a lot easier."
"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."
"The speed of development is the quickest for any tool on the market."
"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."
"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."
"Magic’s Database Gateway allows the logic of the program to be isolated from the underlying database. This provides the flexibility not only to move existing programs to different database environments without the need to change the logic in the program but also allows the programmer access to different databases without the need to know how to "talk" to them."
"The Magic xpa Application Platform is very suitable for production since it is easy to update. The program is simple to upgrade and deploy. The solution is convenient in production. You need to adjust the data, then adjust the program which is not difficult."
"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."
"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.)."
"It would be better if it had a speed niche system. There are a lot of things we need that weren't in the latest version. But I think they will be adding something."
"There is a lack of a community environment."
"There could be better support for augmented reality and other things. Geolocation and background app activity are some of the things that are a little more clumsy at the moment and could be improved."
"Ionic is a cross-platform framework, so when we compare Ionic with native Android and iOS, we can see the drawbacks. For example, if you need to work on very high-level aspects of an application such as animation, even if everything else is not putting load on the app, you will still see high load from the server side."
"Ionic could improve in the Native mode because while we do testing it is difficult to find the root cause of problems. It could be more user-friendly."
"Ionic's UI component doesn't always look like the native mobile app."
"Ionic would be improved with dynamic design features."
"They started writing Capacitor to get rid of PhoneGap and Cordova, but they haven't yet got all the libraries and all the functionalities. They want you to start using Capacitor, but they don't have all the libraries there. They're developing them as they go. So, currently, you have to mix and match the three. When it comes to mobile applications, I would only like to use Capacitor. I don't want to jump between Cordova and Capacitor or have both of them. That's the main thing for me, but they have been working on it."
"There is room for improvement in Magic's marketing and licensing. I would like to see more integration of web functionality."
"The ability to display page up, page down, top and bottom buttons along the scroll bar would make my mouse-reliant customers happy."
"They want to be one toolbox for everything, but primarily, we are using xpa to develop desktop applications, and in that area they're lacking functionalities, flexibility, and modern stuff."
"The Android environment is missing a number of functions for file/folder manipulation, sending receiving text messages (SMS) and the menuing options are limited. For now, it is left to the developer to write his/her own Java functions to include in the APK."
"The user interface could be improved to be more friendly for developers."
"Magic has a tradition, when it adds new technologies/features to the Magic development tool, to provide either no documentation or documentation that does not provide an organized approach for bringing this new technology/feature to experienced Magic programmers."
"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."
"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."
More Magic xpa Application Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
Ionic is ranked 5th in Mobile Development Platforms with 14 reviews while Magic xpa Application Platform is ranked 11th in Mobile Development Platforms with 10 reviews. Ionic is rated 8.6, while Magic xpa Application Platform is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Ionic writes "Great user acceptance and reliability, multiple teams not required, with prompt customer service". On the other hand, 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". Ionic is most compared with Xamarin Platform, OutSystems, Appium, Mendix and Appzillon Digital Platform, whereas Magic xpa Application Platform is most compared with Microsoft .NET Framework, OutSystems, Mendix and GeneXus. See our Ionic vs. Magic xpa Application Platform 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.