We performed a comparison between Appian and Microsoft Powerapps based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison of Results: Based on the parameters we compared, Microsoft Powerapps seems to be the superior solution. Our reviewers find that Appian’s need for integration improvement makes Microsoft Powerapps the better choice.
"There is no need to worry about vulnerabilities in the system, because Appian built a secure system."
"Appian's most valuable features are the quick time it takes to develop for the market. It's easy and faster than other BPM solutions."
"Write to Data Store Entity - Saving data in SQL databases is done easily using entities. Entities (CDTs in Appian terminology) define relationships and target schema tables via XSD files."
"Low code development: Code can be developed pretty quickly which leads to less turnaround time for automation of business processes."
"The most valuable features of Appian are the VPN engine, it is fast, lightweight, and easy to set up business rules. Business teams can do it by themselves. That is a very good feature."
"Since implementing we have had a faster time to solution, with fewer resources needed."
"Technical support has been amazing overall."
"It has very flexible adaptation and the ability to save and automate processes."
"It is good for using for small apps and automation on Office stuff."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft PowerApps is the user interface."
"The most valuable feature is that PowerApps can be used by most business users. It is not only for programmers."
"There are a lot of different applications; you can connect PowerApps, or Flow, or Power BI to many different types of applications to interchange data."
"Creating a PowerApp is very easy. All I do is link and share the result with my colleagues. Deployment is very fast."
"The most valuable feature is the completeness of the concept. It is not restricted by where you are allowed to use it and that is its greatest strength."
"Can design apps quickly and can connect to any database."
"I like the galleries, which are really powerful."
"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."
"Offline capabilities and responsive capabilities could be better. The mobility features of Appian platform are still evolving."
"A point of improvement would be the SAIL forms. The built-in tool used to generate forms does not have debugging support (to view local variables as they change on live preview, and step-by-step valuation) which is a big drawback for form development. Moreover, the script language used to build SAIL forms does not support inheritance or lambda expressions (functions as arguments of other functions), which makes the code base more verbose."
"Native mobile capabilities or hybrid mobile app capabilities are very limited. Things like offline sync, offline storage, access to smartphone device features, etc. are not supported by the Appian platform yet."
"One room for improvement is the ease of UI UX development, like in OutSystems and Mendix."
"There should be more flexibility for the developers to choose the look and feel of the UI. They should have a better ability to design their widgets and customize them with different colors, shapes, and sizes. That is a limitation that could be improved upon."
"What could be improved is more on the front end perspective, like the user interface and the mobile application aspect."
"Appian is easy to set up, but JBoss is complex. JBoss is the application server for running Appian."
"I have heard from developers that there is documentation missing in the reporting."
"I have always felt that you need an IT background to use this solution."
"In my experience, the solution's deployment can be tricky."
"You can't add too many filters onto anything you build, otherwise, it will be very slow and it will affect your performance."
"In an upcoming release, I would like to see custom APIs, better integration with other solutions, and more connectors available."
"The scalability of the solution could improve."
"I would like to have more options for changing the layout because customizing something as simple as colors is very hard."
"We would like to see the period for viewing executions within this solution to be extended beyond its current limit of 28 days. We would prefer to be able to offer our customers an infinite amount of history to search."
Appian is ranked 6th in Rapid Application Development Software with 58 reviews while Microsoft Power Apps is ranked 1st in Rapid Application Development Software with 78 reviews. Appian is rated 8.4, while Microsoft Power Apps is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Appian writes "Low resource consumption, easy setup, and stable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Power Apps writes "Low-code, low learning curve, and reduces manpower". Appian is most compared with Camunda, ServiceNow, OutSystems, Pega BPM and Mendix, whereas Microsoft Power Apps is most compared with Oracle Application Express (APEX), Mendix, ServiceNow, Microsoft Azure App Service and Salesforce Platform. See our Appian vs. Microsoft Power Apps report.
See our list of best Rapid Application Development Software vendors and best Low-Code Development Platforms 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.