Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Microsoft Power Apps vs OpenText Process Automation comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Microsoft Power Apps
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
96
Ranking in other categories
Rapid Application Development Software (1st), Low-Code Development Platforms (1st)
OpenText Process Automation
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
Business Process Management (BPM) (28th)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Process, Business Automation, and Digital Transformation solutions, they serve different purposes. Microsoft Power Apps is designed for Rapid Application Development Software and holds a mindshare of 9.0%, down 15.1% compared to last year.
OpenText Process Automation, on the other hand, focuses on Business Process Management (BPM), holds 1.2% mindshare, up 0.5% since last year.
Rapid Application Development Software Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Microsoft Power Apps9.0%
ServiceNow6.2%
Oracle Application Express (APEX)5.9%
Other78.9%
Rapid Application Development Software
Business Process Management (BPM) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Process Automation1.2%
Camunda9.2%
IBM BPM4.3%
Other85.3%
Business Process Management (BPM)
 

Featured Reviews

BS
Automation Enthusiast at Self employed
Low-code AI workflows have streamlined content curation and currently support rapid app creation
Microsoft Power Apps could be improved because there are still a lot of jargons and too many moving parts. For example, if you look at Copilot, the term Copilot is confusing in the sense of whether it is Copilot in M365, Copilot Studio, or Copilot in Microsoft Power Apps. There is a plan designer which uses Copilot. The whole thing how AI has been positioned is still not lucid for the end user. An end user wants to know exactly what they want and where they go to get it. I think that could also be because things are evolving so fast. From an end-user perspective, the way it has been positioned, the clarity and the boundaries between the different types of offerings and AI offerings available is confusing as of now. There should be better clarity on that. The biggest issue I have, and I have also spoken to a few of my clients about this, is the licensing model. In traditional software development, almost 95 percent of the time, the development team bears the cost of the licenses. For example, if I develop something, I may have to pay licenses for four or five different software that I use. As a user, if you use my services, you probably pay something to me as a subscription, but you do not have to bother about the licenses. All that is wrapped under the hood. Unfortunately, in Power Platform as such, and even in other low-code things like UiPath, if you use a premium feature such as Dataverse, almost everything ends up using Dataverse or SQL Server or some relational database. If you use that, then as an app builder or app maker you have to have a premium license. The end user too would need to have a premium license. That really makes the adoption prohibitive. It is too expensive. We are talking about something like around just for Microsoft Power Apps alone, approximately twenty dollars per month, which is extremely high. Another point to consider for what else can be improved in Microsoft Power Apps is that one does not know what compute power one is getting when one buys a license. If you look at the licensing model, you will get to know how much of Dataverse storage you will get in terms of log storage, database storage, and file storage. However, you do not get to know how much of compute power is being given to you. I do not think Microsoft has an SLA saying that any request of a certain amount, such as MB per second, you will get a response time of whatever, one by sixtieth of a second or some millisecond. I do not think that they have that performance SLA in place. They do have storage SLA which comes with the license, but they do not have a corresponding SLA for performance.
Senthil Natarajan - PeerSpot reviewer
Chief Operating Officer at a outsourcing company with 51-200 employees
The solution enables automation of supply chain and invoice processing with comprehensive integration and workflow capabilities
The main valuable features of OpenText AppWorks are the BPM modules. There is the standard BPM modeler and a case modeler. These are two strong features from the workflow layer. Additionally, the integration capability of the solution is beneficial. With these features, we are able to use OpenText AppWorks for automating supply-chain-related problems, vendor process automations, and invoice automations. We have built almost twenty-plus types of solutions and implemented around three hundred fifty-plus implementations. The solution also allows us to integrate it with our ERP system.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Of all of the solutions I evaluated, it was the easiest to use and deploy."
"The solution allows you to use data to create excellent UI and quickly deliver an app. It speeds up production time."
"It allows us to provide all the information in one single place."
"If you're using Microsoft Power Apps to connect to a SharePoint list and create a quick form for business users, it's highly effective."
"The model that allows you to establish flow automation is getting a lot of traction from the customer side. It offers a lot of flexibility."
"I have found the technical support to be helpful."
"The flows are good because they can be used in a variety of situations."
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"One of the most useful features is the code is customizable, we can make it our own."
"The good part of OpenText AppWorks is that all of its components are together in one platform, including integration capability, UI capability, and workflow capability."
"Its customer support is reliable and easy to approach."
"OpenText AppWorks has standard features such as system-to-system and human-to-human integrations, but what I find most valuable in the solution is its monitoring feature that tells you more about your processes, how to restart and how to stop each process, etc."
"From a business perspective, the most valuable aspect lies in the optimization of processes."
"We've automated several processes, including purchase requisition to purchase orders, RFQ processes, vendor onboarding, project budgeting, and business case creation. The recent versions of OpenText AppWorks, especially those incorporating low-code functionalities, have had a significant positive impact. In some cases, we've observed a remarkable reduction in development time, ranging from 50 to 75 percent. The MTP model and life cycle have facilitated rapid development cycles."
"AppWorks is a very quick development platform with low-coding capability and strong integration with third-party systems."
"In terms of the scalability and the handling of complexity, the customers are satisfied, and we also have confidence in the solution to achieve whatever implementations are required."
 

Cons

"The notion people have is that no code equals no knowledge, and that's simply not true. Even though you don't have to write codes, you still have to know what you're doing."
"Most of my training for what I do has been by watching or learning in the community. There needs to be better training on either one of these."
"The solution is evolving very fast and every month new features are introduced. Sometimes it's difficult to catch up with all the evolution that's happening. I had to focus on Power BI for a while and left PowerApps at the side for a couple of months and when I came back, it had changed its interface and moved components around."
"The pricing structure needs to be improved, the current information is confusing."
"I recommend improving Microsoft Power Apps' licensing model. I've encountered challenges related to licensing complexity, which has led some customers to opt for traditional solution development and deployment methods instead."
"Improvements could include more templates for application development, especially those commonly used across different companies."
"On a scale of one to ten, I rate Microsoft's customer service or technical support around a three. I find it's better to read forum posts than to call the support staff at Microsoft."
"Because we have a lot of data and users, achieving an appropriate level of security and privacy is sometimes difficult, especially for sensitive data."
"There could be some improvements with the low code design part. It could be more customizable and more user friendly."
"OpenText AppWork's low-code capabilities can be enhanced by integrating them with AI offerings like Aviator."
"The crucial missing element is the archival function."
"OpenText needs improvements in its integration model to align with newer integration types."
"A room for improvement in OpenText AppWorks is its user interface. It should have mobile compatibility because right now, you still have to make two applications with a user interface for Android and a user interface for iOS, so if OpenText AppWorks can provide one UI that can be used across all devices, that would make the solution better. An additional feature I'd like to see in the next release of OpenText AppWorks is a better UI in terms of the look and feel. Another feature I'd like to see in the next version of the solution is mobile compatibility because, at the moment, you have to make your application mobile-ready or compatible with mobile devices because there's no provision for it in OpenText AppWorks."
"There is room for improvement in the pricing structure."
"From an enterprise point, their pricing is a little bit crazy because they don't have a SaaS model."
"The solution needs to continue to enhance the low-coding feature within the product itself."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is too expensive and the licensing system is complicated. There are many pages of instruction on how to do the calculations for the price."
"One of the main things about this solution is the price. The cost for Salesforce is $35, $25, or $10 per user per month. PowerApps costs much less than that. It is at a good price point. It may change in the future, but at this point, its price is pretty fine."
"In terms of pricing, Power Apps is cost-efficient."
"Pricing for this solution is completely based on user requirement. If your requirement is simple or less complex, then the basic licensing model can work, e.g. the free model, or else, you need to go for the premium features or premium model."
"The pricing is complicated to understand."
"Whatever the cost of licensing is, it is in the millions."
"The product is inexpensive."
"The platform's pricing is reasonable."
"The licensing cost varies based on several factors, such as the size of the customer and the domain URL."
"AppWorks is pretty expensive."
"The price is on the higher side."
"There is a user-based perpetual license."
"Pricing for OpenText AppWorks, specifically in the Indian market, is reasonable, but I'm not aware if it's still reasonable outside of India. The licensing cost is based on the number of licenses and the number of users. OpenText AppWorks has different licensing options."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Rapid Application Development Software solutions are best for your needs.
883,619 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Government
11%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Insurance Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Government
8%
Performing Arts
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business31
Midsize Enterprise17
Large Enterprise50
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Large Enterprise3
 

Questions from the Community

How would you choose between Microsoft PowerApps and Salesforce Platform?
I think it depends on your use case. If your organization uses Microsoft Enterprise products, PowerApps will work better in your environment. Similarly, if you have a Salesforce integration in pla...
Would you choose ServiceNow over Microsoft PowerApps?
Hi Netanya, I will choose ServiceNow because ServiceNow is a very good tool compared to Microsoft PowerApp. Because ServiceNow has a very strong module (Performance Analysis) reporting which will ...
Would you choose Microsoft Azure App Service or PowerApps?
Microsoft Azure App Service is helpful if you need to set up temporary servers for customers to run their programs in locations that other cloud providers do not cater to. When servers are closer t...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for OpenText AppWorks?
From an enterprise point, their pricing is a little bit crazy because they don't have a SaaS model. They have to go with a perpetual model, which makes it look crazy initially. But over a period, i...
What needs improvement with OpenText AppWorks?
They can improve the UI capability. Recently, they launched a low-code platform, called entity modeling, which they can enhance further. It would be beneficial if OpenText ( /products/data-express-...
What is your primary use case for OpenText AppWorks?
We primarily use OpenText AppWorks ( /products/opentext-appworks-reviews ) for automating supply chain-related problems, vendor process automations, and invoice automations. We have our own product...
 

Also Known As

PowerApps, MS PowerApps
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

TransAlta, Rackspace, Telstra
Red Deer County, DHFL Pramerica Life Insurance, Bangkok Airways, PBS, CIZ (Netherlands Ministry of Health), The Dutch Ministry of Defence, Mercer
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft Power Apps vs. OpenText Process Automation and other solutions. Updated: July 2023.
883,619 professionals have used our research since 2012.