We performed a comparison between Magic xpa Application Platform 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."The speed of development is the quickest for any tool on the market."
"Typically an experienced Magic developer can do the work of two to three experienced C#/.NET developers. Customers are amazed at how quickly most new features can be added and bug fixes implemented. I have worked for four employers - including myself - using Magic, and in most instances, bug fixes are addressed and deployed in under six hours."
"Speed of development and database connectivity (MS SQL, Oracle, DB2, Btrieve/Pervasive PSQL, ODBC, MySql, and SQLite)."
"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."
"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."
"The solution makes the managing and adapting of the software very easy."
"Magic is rapid, it's a tool which we use to develop, change and maintain our programs. xpa has a lot more features onboard and it gives us the opportunity to do such things so that we can easily adapt and maintain our programs. It gives certain benefits to stay with our customers and the market."
"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's amazing that you can build web apps and mobile (hybrid) apps with one code base in a few clicks. It's a full continuous integration environment."
"The most valuable features are the decorative style, model-driven development, and the fact that Mendix validates flows. Mendix is quick to develop because it's a low-code platform. It's very robust, flexible, open, and scalable. It's for a low-code customer. The tooling is also really good and it has mobile capabilities."
"What I like best about Mendix is that it's leading the way for low-code, no-code platforms compared to other solutions in the market."
"Mendix has made a great deal of effort to provide its developers a healthy, modern environment for developing. First of all, it adopts Agile methodology by creating a SCRUM-based app where you can handle your user stories. Next comes version control, which really allows multiple team members to collaborate quite easily. And last but not least, Mendix modeler, which is your IDE for developing Mendix apps."
"The initial setup is easy."
"There is a free version of the solution you can use."
"The user experience is great."
"It is a brilliant solution."
"Support is very bad."
"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."
"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."
"The configuration of the xpa RIA mobile environment is complex and a discouragement to new developers. Also, Magic's documentation can be less than complete at times which leads to frustration for new developers. (I encourage new Magic developers to join the Magic Users Group)."
"The user interface could be improved to be more friendly for developers."
"I would like to see a spell checker included with optional language support. Currently, this has to be purchased from a third-party."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"I would also like to see automatic adjustment to the Java Heap, whenever an application load becomes too much for the application. It could also use hot database replication."
"Needs multiple database connections so an app can directly read/write data to/from multiple databases. This would enable easy splitting of big applications that have complex entity relationships."
"The platform still has many areas for improvement. If I compare apples to apples, the PWA features of Mendix could be improved, for example, I wouldn't recommend creating a B2C or B2B marketplace or web portals on Mendix, but there's a tendency for people to still do it through the systems provided by my company, particularly implement B2B or B2C marketplace, versus using eBay or Shopify. On the web portal front, Mendix still needs to improve."
"Feature-wise and in terms of technical aspects, Mendix is excellent, but its pricing is steep."
"Overall, integration with the enterprise ecosystem needs improvement."
"My understanding is that, if you are not using the free version, it is very expensive."
"It could use a more comprehensive widget creation studio in the IDE."
More Magic xpa Application Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
Magic xpa Application Platform is ranked 11th in Mobile Development Platforms with 10 reviews while Mendix is ranked 2nd in Mobile Development Platforms with 48 reviews. Magic xpa Application Platform is rated 8.6, while Mendix 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 Mendix writes "Low-code, helpful support, and great native mobile capability". Magic xpa Application Platform is most compared with Microsoft .NET Framework, OutSystems and GeneXus, whereas Mendix is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, OutSystems, Appian, Oracle Application Express (APEX) and ServiceNow. See our Magic xpa Application Platform vs. Mendix 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.