We performed a comparison between Appian and Jitterbit Vinyl 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."Good workflow engines that bridge the gaps of processes."
"Appian's most valuable feature is that we can create end-to-end process workflows with minimum turnaround."
"The process models provide self-documenting systems."
"Technical support is helpful."
"The setup is easy."
"We appreciate the drag and drop functionality and the easy to access plug and play features."
"It provides us with real-time data on all connected systems in terms of how they're integrated with each other and how they are performing in a workflow manner."
"There is no need to worry about vulnerabilities in the system, because Appian built a secure system."
"When it comes to the speed of development of the applications with Zudy VINYL it has been the fastest and most powerful that I've been able to do. We've tried building things from scratch. It takes an enormous amount of time. We've cut that time by probably a fifth, with more power. I've been very happy with the speed of doing things in Zudy VINYL."
"The fact that it's no-code is one of the most important features because it allows us to deliver very quickly. We can get the value to the business delivered much more quickly than with other solutions."
"You do not need to be a programmer to use it or build something in it."
"It's made things seamless and it's more efficient, and there's an audit trail where it wasn't there before."
"Vinyl has been a game changer in how we can now quickly deploy key features and new products."
"Valuable features include the ability to connect to disparate data sources, the workflow engine, and the speed and agility in building apps."
"App development, database storage, and 3rd party app integrations are great."
"The ZPM system enables us to organize projects and monitor their progress. The ease of logging into the VINYL app to test new features makes testing smoother, and we feel more involved in the creation of the app and its functions at every step of the way."
"It would be useful if they could create an academy or forum in the future to help active users answer questions they have about the solution."
"It is also not easy to learn. Training tutorials could be improved."
"Offline capabilities and responsive capabilities could be better. The mobility features of Appian platform are still evolving."
"My only request is that they decrease the license costs."
"Something I would like to see improved is an SQL database connection."
"Sometimes, clients expect us to implement ERP using Appian, which is very complicated. In such cases, I don't believe that Appian is a good tool for that."
"The biggest areas of improvement would be in facilitating team development, DevOps, and integration with typical tools used in enterprise development (Jenkins, Subversion, etc.)"
"Form creation and SAIL proprietary language still basically require programming. The claim a BA type can do everything is hogwash."
"There are some acknowledged technical limitations. I was looking to do some metadata manipulation, which is very atypical. Zudy said that they will work on building me a workaround. If there is a weakness, that would be it."
"Right now it's very dependent on having an imagination to understand."
"The documentation isn't everything it could be, and the user forum is not always the most helpful."
"Upload time of documents that needed to be uploaded was a request that we were having an issue with. That issue got resolved in [near] real time, within probably 30 minutes."
"Some aspects of VINYL are limiting from a B2C standpoint. For example, it would be nice to have more flexibility with what the VINYL parameters allow us to develop within the app. It is difficult to think of an example off the top of my head, but there have been times when we couldn't develop something a particular way because VINYL didn't support it. However, the team Zudy assigned to us has been great about adjusting and finding ways around these hurdles."
"Once or twice, when a new version of VINYL comes out, it has had a negative impact on a feature. However, we do everything in a test environment. Unless we miss something in test, we don't go live with it if it isn't perfect. Zudy hasn't had too many stumbles along the way, but there have been a couple times, and it's been minor."
"I'd like to see the next release of VINYL have more user interface solutions to it, so that it could be a more user-friendly product on the front end for the customers that are utilizing the tool. We didn't have a solution to help automate all of our reporting in the past which identified the need to make sure that we could tap into our data sources and automate all of our reporting, which is exactly why we needed the tool."
"It might help if they put out different types that would provide different ways to view the data. I'd like to see more on that."
Appian is ranked 6th in Rapid Application Development Software with 57 reviews while Jitterbit Vinyl is ranked 20th in Rapid Application Development Software with 31 reviews. Appian is rated 8.4, while Jitterbit Vinyl is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Appian writes "Low resource consumption, easy setup, and stable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Jitterbit Vinyl writes "Can connect to any data source so we don't need to replicate data into a data warehouse to do reporting analytics". Appian is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, OutSystems, Camunda, ServiceNow and Pega BPM, whereas Jitterbit Vinyl is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, QuickBase and OutSystems. See our Appian vs. Jitterbit Vinyl 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.