We performed a comparison between GitHub CoPilot 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."GitHub CoPilot helps us auto-complete code. The tool's context awareness benefits our projects because it identifies the context in which we are working and automatically proposes solutions that we use."
"GitHub CoPilot accelerates productivity. It is an easy-to-use solution that is also helpful in saving the team's time."
"The initial setup of the product is easy."
"The product is easy to integrate."
"The product's initial setup is straightforward because it's pushed through the updates."
"The most valuable aspects in terms of features, revolve around its code generation capabilities."
"The document generation features are valuable."
"When I write code, I feel like I have someone sitting with me to help me. Wherever I'm stuck, I just ask a question, and it provides guidance that I can use."
"OutSystems is easy to use."
"Refactoring with TrueChange is very simple."
"The scratch coding is useful. The solution is easy to understand."
"Our previous solution had other overheads such as release management, version management, code management, monitoring, etc., all of which are built-in with OutSystems."
"OutSystems' best feature is that you can build tests with the flow, so even the tests are made in the PDD framework in a low-code way."
"It is much easier to develop applications with the product’s IDE."
"It is a stable solution, and the initial setup is straightforward."
"One thing I like about OutSystems is that there's no lock-in. You can keep running your applications because it's on .NET and hosted centrally. That's one of the advantages I see there in terms of not having an IT strategy that has a dependency on a particular platform."
"The tool needs to focus on integration, as it is the most important aspect. I would like to see some pre-designed modules included in my projects."
"In certain instances, OpenAI didn't respond in the expected way. The responses were more general and didn't address the specific point."
"There's room for improvement to ensure that suggestions align more precisely with the context of what I'm seeking, minimizing instances of unrelated or inaccurate code suggestions."
"In a few cases, the results aren't correct, so that needs improvement. Also, it would be great if the results could be presented in different formats, not just text. As engineers, it takes time to read through text-based results."
"Some of the suggestions provided by GitHub CoPilot are not accurate, making it an area of concern where improvements are required."
"GitHub CoPilot's stability is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"The solution is expensive. It should also support other programming languages."
"GitHub CoPilot's alerting features need improvement."
"The prices should be lower. It is a little bit too high for a small market."
"Mobile apps need improvement."
"In my opinion, the support and the pricing could be better."
"The largest obstacle currently associated with OutSystems is its high cost and limited availability of skilled personnel. Despite being a rapid application development platform, having a highly skilled individual familiar with the platform can be much more beneficial than an inexperienced individual. Because there is a shortage of people with the necessary OutSystems skills, utilizing the platform can become expensive. This makes little sense, considering that a rapid application development platform should be accessible to the average person. However, having a highly skilled individual can greatly increase productivity, making the cost worthwhile."
"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."
"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."
"Its ability to create and run automated tasks could be better."
"OutSystems does not provide any native reporting resources. All reports must be created with other tools or as a webpage."
GitHub CoPilot is ranked 15th in Rapid Application Development Software with 11 reviews while OutSystems is ranked 3rd in Rapid Application Development Software with 46 reviews. GitHub CoPilot is rated 8.6, while OutSystems is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of GitHub CoPilot writes "Though it offers good integration features, the price needs to be lowered". 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 ". GitHub CoPilot is most compared with GitLab, Oracle Application Express (APEX), Pega BPM, ServiceNow and Adobe ColdFusion, whereas OutSystems is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, Appian, Mendix, ServiceNow and SAP Mobile Platform. See our GitHub CoPilot 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.