We performed a comparison between Appian and Unqork based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Oracle, OutSystems and others in Rapid Application Development Software."The tool is very flexible."
"The solution's most valuable features are the regular periodic and quarterly updates, they are very useful updates. They keep improving the solution more often, and that helps the platform or code always be up to date with the latest features."
"In terms of interface, it's very good. In terms of infrastructure, it's amazing and already using multiple tools behind the scenes. It's a low-code platform, so it's very easy to implement."
"I find the BPM the most valuable feature."
"The application life cycle is very clear. I started learning it and giving some workshops to my team. Creating the users and the building is very structured. Documentation is nice and it's easy to learn."
"With low-code, we don't need a lot of coding, and then from the plumbing perspective, there is a complete CI/CD pipeline that exists within Appian that can be leveraged for open deployment."
"Process Modeling enables creation of business process workflows. You can create complex business workflows in a visual manner, and it is also easy to debug/monitor."
"We appreciate the drag and drop functionality and the easy to access plug and play features."
"Unqork UI behaves consistently across devices and seamlessly adapts to various form factors."
"The tool itself is pretty good, but the main area that we struggled with was the backend. The frontend development is really good, but the backend modeling can be streamlined a little bit. There are good integrations, but tying them through the data layer and then up into the frontend could be improved a little bit. It does read/write on the data source, and you can configure it to just write or just read, but there is a little bit of work involved."
"While Appian is generally flexible, it's rigid in some ways. It takes longer to do something that isn't available out of the box."
"The UI of Appian is more internal. Recently, there has been an addition of an external user portal for the customer-facing stuff. It's still coming out."
"Offline capabilities and responsive capabilities could be better. The mobility features of Appian platform are still evolving."
"It is difficult to set up the on-premise version."
"Even though the company has made great improvements in online documentation, featuring rich material which includes case studies of real-life use cases, the material could definitely be better in quality and coverage of use cases."
"It is also not easy to learn. Training tutorials could be improved."
"The graphical user interface could be easier to use. It should be simplified."
"The addition of Azure and Google Cloud alongside AWS would allow our deployment options to better align with enterprise strategic cloud choices outside just Amazon."
Appian is ranked 6th in Rapid Application Development Software with 58 reviews while Unqork is ranked 24th in Rapid Application Development Software with 1 review. Appian is rated 8.4, while Unqork is rated 7.0. The top reviewer of Appian writes "Low resource consumption, easy setup, and stable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Unqork writes "Great UI and out-of-the-box integrations, but needs expanded cloud platform support". Appian is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, Camunda, ServiceNow, OutSystems and Adobe Experience Manager (AEM) Forms, whereas Unqork is most compared with Pega BPM, Microsoft Power Apps, Salesforce Platform, OutSystems and ServiceNow Now Platform.
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.