We performed a comparison between GeneXus and Ionic 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."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."
"The solution provides ease of programming and the speed of delivery of demands."
"With the solution, I can work a normal day. I can plan my work and any other activities for days ahead."
"It is fast in creating systems and connects to the database quickly."
"GeneXus evolves with technology."
"The front-end features are the most valuable."
"This solution works extremely quickly in terms of enabling an application in a production environment."
"Because it's a hybrid mobile app framework, it is easy for us to develop iOS as well as Android apps for our customers with the same resource skills. We didn't have to have separate iOS teams and Android teams to build the apps. We still have to use the Apple Xcode for iOS, but the main development happens with JavaScript, HTML, and CSS. We don't have to write separate code bases in scripts for iOS and Android. We create apps using web-based technology."
"The solution is secure, reliable, and packed with features so we can easily implement apps even in the most complex situations."
"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."
"The most valuable feature is the one code deployed to all solutions, which means you do not need to have multiple teams."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"With the Capacitor feature, you have access to the native attributes of your phone such as your camera. This makes work a lot easier."
"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."
"The tool needs to be tuned before being used. You need some experience to get the best out of the tool."
"Documentation is always an issue. In order to develop with GeneXus, there is very little documentation. The documentation is not clear enough in order to develop a great tool."
"The front-end with GeneXus is not as good as the back-end."
"GeneXus is a wonderful tool for the backend. It's the best in the world, but for the frontend, GeneXus needs to improve. There should be easier steps for managing various aspects, such as alerts and messages to show to the end-users."
"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."
"It's expensive for a company."
"There are issues in integrating it with other solutions."
"The documentation could be improved."
"Ionic would be improved with dynamic design features."
"It would be good if the mobile version uses something other than JavaScript and HTML."
"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 a lack of a community environment."
"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."
"Documentation for migrations and compatibility is insufficient."
"Ionic's UI component doesn't always look like the native mobile app."
GeneXus is ranked 8th in Mobile Development Platforms with 13 reviews while Ionic is ranked 5th in Mobile Development Platforms with 14 reviews. GeneXus is rated 8.6, while Ionic is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of GeneXus writes "Fast, stable, and allows us to model a workflow before developing the screens". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Ionic writes "Great user acceptance and reliability, multiple teams not required, with prompt customer service". GeneXus is most compared with Oracle Application Express (APEX), Microsoft Power Apps, OutSystems and Mendix, whereas Ionic is most compared with Xamarin Platform, OutSystems, Appium and Mendix. See our GeneXus vs. Ionic 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.