We performed a comparison between HCL Domino and OutSystems based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Rapid Application Development Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."I like that HCL Domino is stable. It's a great product. I also like that HCL Domino is a mature product under IBM, which is why many companies use it."
"Domino's dual functionality as both a messaging and application solution is a standout feature compared to Exchange, which solely focuses on messaging."
"HCL Domino is an application development and collaboration platform with strong stability and security. Deployment of this platform is easy and takes only 10 minutes."
"HCL Domino is the best product from a security point of view."
"We can scale it if we want to."
"We have been able to set up a portal using a special XPage application that gives our customers access to this system."
"The most valuable feature of HCL Domino is how robust it is."
"This solution can be used for workflow application so that applications can be easily developed."
"It is very stable."
"I really like the one-click publish feature in OutSystems. In other development tools/languages, it's not as easy. I also like how easily I can manage all my projects in one place."
"OutSystems is a low-code solution. Most features are like drag-and-drop, so it's pretty easy to work. Thus it helps the organization by saving time for developers."
"It is much easier to develop applications with the product’s IDE."
"The architecture of OutSystems is quite simple, and the features are similar to Mendix's. OutSystems has connectors for different enterprise apps and solid reporting capabilities. You can also integrate with any content management platform like SharePoint or Adobe Enterprise Manager, or something like that. You can also create and integrate workflows."
"Integrations with external systems with SOAP and REST are easy to implement off-the-shelf, but a developer can always implement specific libraries for other integrations."
"It is easy to use."
"The most valuable feature is Agile development. I love that you save a lot of time on development and can focus on logic and business requirements."
"The solution could improve Kubernetes or Dockers migration to new environments in the cloud."
"The solution is expensive."
"HCL Domino could have a better interface."
"An area for improvement in HCL Domino is security. New enhancements in the IT industry mean that security should be improved. The HCL Domino GUI also needs improvement."
"When you compare with Microsoft Exchange, the UI could be more user-friendly."
"They should provide its integration with other AI applications."
"HCL Domino needs to be more user-friendly."
"It would be advantageous if the web server could seamlessly pick up configuration changes without the need for a complete restart."
"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 documentation needs to be more robust."
"Since we first started using OutSystems, they switched their language support from Java and .NET to .NET only, which was a bit of a surprise. Their language support could be better in this sense, although on our resource side it is now a bit more flexible."
"The prices should be lower. It is a little bit too high for a small market."
"The new version could be improved."
"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 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."
"The dashboards in OutSystems could improve. There are a lot of tabs in the service center that can be confusing."
HCL Domino is ranked 17th in Rapid Application Development Software with 18 reviews while OutSystems is ranked 3rd in Rapid Application Development Software with 46 reviews. HCL Domino is rated 8.0, while OutSystems is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of HCL Domino writes "A stable and versatile enterprise solution consolidating various functions like email, collaboration, and application development in a user-friendly manner". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OutSystems writes "The visual program provides the advantage of only requiring one skill set for both the front and backend ". HCL Domino is most compared with Microsoft Exchange, Microsoft Power Apps, HCL Notes, Zimbra Collaboration and Microsoft Exchange Online, whereas OutSystems is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, Appian, Mendix, ServiceNow and Oracle Application Express (APEX). See our HCL Domino vs. OutSystems report.
See our list of best Rapid Application Development Software vendors.
We monitor all Rapid Application Development Software 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.