We compared Appian and OutSystems based on our user's reviews in several parameters.
In summary, Appian is praised for its intuitive interface, customizable workflows, seamless integration, efficient task management, and robust reporting capabilities, with highly regarded customer support but improvements needed in UI, performance, scalability, and reporting features. On the other hand, OutSystems is valued for its ease of use, rapid application development, platform compatibility, scalability, built-in tools, and strong support, with positive feedback on pricing and ROI, although users desire increased speed in development, improved UI, more customization options, enhanced collaboration features, and smoother integration capabilities.
Features: Appian stands out for its intuitive interface, customizable workflows, seamless integration, task management, and powerful reporting capabilities. OutSystems, on the other hand, excels in ease of use, rapid app development, compatibility, scalability, tools, integration options, support system, time-saving, and cost-effectiveness.
Pricing and ROI: The setup cost for Appian product has been mentioned by users as requiring consideration. In contrast, OutSystems product has been described as having a straightforward and hassle-free setup cost., Appian users have expressed satisfaction with its efficiency in streamlining processes, decision-making capabilities, and ability to achieve business goals. They also find value in its automation features, resulting in time and cost savings. On the other hand, OutSystems users have reported increased efficiency, streamlined processes, improved productivity, and cost savings due to its ease of use, quick development time, and scalability.
Room for Improvement: Appian: Users have requested improvements in user interface, performance, scalability, and reporting features. OutSystems: Users seek increased performance, efficiency, and speed in development. They suggest intuitive UI, customization options, enhanced collaboration, and smoother integration capabilities.
Deployment and customer support: The reviews for Appian and OutSystems indicate that there may be differences in the time required for deployment, setup, and implementation. User feedback suggests that Appian users may mention different timeframes for deployment and setup, while OutSystems users mention specific timeframes for deployment and setup. It is important to carefully consider these differences when evaluating the products., Appian's customer service is highly regarded and praised by users. The support staff is knowledgeable, friendly, and willing to go the extra mile. OutSystems also has positive feedback, with customers appreciating prompt responses and helpful troubleshooting throughout the development process.
The summary above is based on 50 interviews we conducted recently with Appian and OutSystems users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"Even with an on-premise implementation, the scalability is still high, so it is easy to scale up."
"It reduces development time in half making us more efficient."
"It has good integrations. We were looking for out-of-the-box integration with both on-prem and publicly accessible data sources. We needed integration with the cloud, OData, our REST API feed, and then on-prem passthrough to go to a SQL database or on-prem APIs through Azure local deployment, etc."
"Since implementing we have had a faster time to solution, with fewer resources needed."
"There is a version coming out every six months with performance improvements."
"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."
"The most valuable features of Appian are workflow management and the ease with which you can build the UI."
"The most productive aspect of Appian lies in its ability to develop interfaces, particularly user interfaces. Creating user interfaces is highly productive, when these interfaces are integrated with the original database. In such cases, using record types proves to be a very efficient method of handling data. The synergy between interfaces and record types enhances productivity."
"The solution helps to build mobile and web applications on SOAP and REST. You can integrate it with backend systems by submitting a code."
"It is a stable solution, and the initial setup is straightforward."
"I like the mobile features the most, and there are also various features around the portal we created that I enjoy."
"OutSystems is easy to use."
"OutSystems is a low-code solution. Most features are like drag-and-drop, so it's pretty easy to work. Thus it helps the organization by saving time for developers."
"We used almost all of the features, themes, styling guide, and approach components. They are useful in our applications."
"It is a scalable solution...The initial setup of OutSystems is easy."
"The most valuable feature of OutSystems is the drag and drop and toolchains in the small AI developing environment. Additionally, the documentation is helpful."
"It is also not easy to learn. Training tutorials could be improved."
"Appian could include other applications that we could reuse for other customers, CRM for example."
"It would be nice if you could create your own customized apps when the business needed them."
"It needs better integration with our existing application ecosystem."
"The solution could use some more tutorials to help brand new users figure out how to use the product effectively."
"The biggest areas of improvement would be in facilitating team development, DevOps, and integration with typical tools used in enterprise development (Jenkins, Subversion, etc.)"
"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."
"There could be a scope of enhancement for capturing the variety of use cases."
"The product could be improved if there was a shortcut, or predefined, predictable templates provided."
"The new version could be improved."
"The latest version of the app generation tools could be more user-friendly."
"The initial setup is a little difficult."
"We'd like OutSystems to add stronger workflow-based automation similar to what Appian offers. It needs more workflow modeling and RPA features."
"The PDD framework can't be used for the behavioral-driven development way of working."
"Currently, in mobile applications, we don't have push notifications."
"The asynchronous processing and multithreading tasks for which the current resources of the platform are very generic and not built for the end-user. Any asynchronous jobs have to be constructed with an end-user dashboard to allow inspection of the status of the activities."
Appian is ranked 5th in Low-Code Development Platforms with 58 reviews while OutSystems is ranked 3rd in Low-Code Development Platforms with 46 reviews. Appian is rated 8.4, while OutSystems is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Appian writes "Low resource consumption, easy setup, and stable". 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 ". Appian is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, Camunda, ServiceNow, Pega BPM and Mendix, whereas OutSystems is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, Mendix, ServiceNow, Oracle Application Express (APEX) and Pega BPM. See our Appian vs. OutSystems report.
See our list of best Low-Code Development Platforms vendors and best Rapid Application Development Software vendors.
We monitor all Low-Code 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.