We performed a comparison between Appian and GeneXus based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Low-Code Development Platforms solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The technical support is excellent."
"SAIL (Self-Assembling Interface Layer), a scripting language provided by Appian. It is the equivalent of JS and CSS. It allows creation of complex UIs which are also responsive. With SAIL, we have a single language for both the UI logic and its appearance. UI components can be built as reusable components and used in multiple UI interfaces."
"What I found most valuable in Appian is that it lets you drill down on multiple things through the structure of the reporting and UI side. It's also low-code, yet it results in quick deliverables."
"Low code development: Code can be developed pretty quickly which leads to less turnaround time for automation of business processes."
"Technical support has been amazing overall."
"The initial setup was seamless. We didn't run into any hardships at all."
"It has very flexible adaptation and the ability to save and automate processes."
"The initial setup is easy."
"With the solution, I can work a normal day. I can plan my work and any other activities for days ahead."
"The solution provides ease of programming and the speed of delivery of demands."
"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."
"I like that it's very compatible with other tools. The most important feature is getting the developer to focus on the project's business case. It's not about focusing on how I can command this or how I can develop a front end, or how I can work with the advantages. The developer should focus on the business case of the project. No need to focus on connecting the database to the server or connecting the server and the front end. The developer can concentrate on the views."
"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."
"I find the implementation process of GeneXus to be easy."
"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."
"Lacks business rules management as part of the solution."
"Occasionally, certain pre-made modules may not be necessary and customers may desire greater customization options. Instead of being limited to pre-designed features, they may prefer a more flexible version that allows for greater customization."
"Authoring tool is slow to use resulted in limitations on how quickly solutions can be built."
"Appian could include other applications that we could reuse for other customers, CRM for example."
"The solution could improve robotic process automation."
"The biggest areas of improvement would be in facilitating team development, DevOps, and integration with typical tools used in enterprise development (Jenkins, Subversion, etc.)"
"We would like to see more reduced latency. We would like to make sure that the scale-out factor will be much more as workloads come in."
"We would like to have more granular control for interface styling."
"GeneXus's user interface has room for improvement."
"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."
"I told them to add something about Angular. They're already working on adding it."
"The front-end with GeneXus is not as good as the back-end."
"It's expensive for a company."
"The tool needs to be tuned before being used. You need some experience to get the best out of the tool."
"There are issues in integrating it with other solutions."
"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."
Appian is ranked 5th in Low-Code Development Platforms with 58 reviews while GeneXus is ranked 12th in Low-Code Development Platforms with 13 reviews. Appian is rated 8.4, while GeneXus is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Appian writes "Low resource consumption, easy setup, and stable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of GeneXus writes "Fast, stable, and allows us to model a workflow before developing the screens". Appian is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, OutSystems, Camunda, ServiceNow and Pega BPM, whereas GeneXus is most compared with Oracle Application Express (APEX), Microsoft Power Apps, OutSystems, Mendix and Magic xpa Application Platform. See our Appian vs. GeneXus report.
See our list of best Low-Code Development Platforms vendors.
We monitor all Low-Code 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.