We performed a comparison between Adobe ColdFusion and Appian 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."No need to import libraries from outside the environment."
"We save enormous amounts of time in development using this tool."
"The ability to write SQL queries was very helpful as we did not need to bother our DBAs in writing stored procedures for simple tasks."
"I would like to say that its best feature is its different kinds of connectors. We have lots of in-built connectors."
"I find it to be the easiest server-side technology for website development. It easily integrates with virtually everything– from web APIs to NoSQL databases to RSS and XML services."
"This tool was very easy learn, yet powerful enough to manage many sites on a single instance."
"Apart from providing a mature, reliable, consistent platform, Adobe also offers outstanding customer service and product support."
"My client has been able to improve productivity with the use of the tool. The solution has them develop several tools that addressed their specific needs. They have become more efficient and safe with the use of the product."
"Process culture is making noise inside the organization because now, everybody knows that their time is being monitored."
"The process models provide self-documenting systems."
"It has created executable requirements and speeds up the SDLC process greatly."
"The Application Designer is very user friendly. There are also lot of plug-ins that you can use and, for the most part, they are free."
"Call Web Service Smart Service - Web service integrations with other systems are super simple and fast to create, supported by low code menus."
"Technical support is quite responsive."
"It's a stable product."
"Compared to other code tools that I've seen, Appian has a more robust rules engine"
"There is not much third party authenticators in this solution"
"Installation of the server software was formidable due the number of configurable options."
"Need to be able to Be able to inject Python, Java, Groovy, or PHP code into a CFML page."
"ColdFusion’s third-party authentication is currently limited to just a couple of companies, like Google and Facebook, and a few third-party SAML authenticators. From my personal perspective, adding LinkedIn and Microsoft would greatly benefit me."
"The solution needs to improve its adaption capability with a third-party company. I want to see more communities or open knowledge resources with the tool."
"Previously when I was trying to create some data, it was very difficult to get real-time data from Workfront."
"What could be improved is more on the front end perspective, like the user interface and the mobile application aspect."
"We would like to see more reduced latency. We would like to make sure that the scale-out factor will be much more as workloads come in."
"There are four areas I believe Appian could improve in. The first is a seamless contact center integration. Appian does not have a contact center feature. The second is advanced features in RPA. The third would be chatbot and email bot integration—while Appian comes with chatbot and email bot, it's not as mature as it should be, compared to the competition. The fourth area would be next best action, since there is not much of this sort of feature in Appian. These are all features which competitors' products have, and in a mature manner, whereas Appian lacks on these four areas. I see customers who are moving from Appian to Pega because these features are not in Appian."
"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."
"There could be a scope of enhancement for capturing the variety of use cases."
"One room for improvement is the ease of UI UX development, like in OutSystems and Mendix."
"Appian has a few areas for improvement, which my organization raised with the Appian team. One is the Excel output which is limited to fifty columns when it should be up to two hundred or three hundred columns."
"Form creation and SAIL proprietary language still basically require programming. The claim a BA type can do everything is hogwash."
Adobe ColdFusion is ranked 21st in Rapid Application Development Software with 6 reviews while Appian is ranked 6th in Rapid Application Development Software with 58 reviews. Adobe ColdFusion is rated 8.6, while Appian is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Adobe ColdFusion writes "An easy-to-setup tool that can be used to automate repetitive tasks". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Appian writes "Low resource consumption, easy setup, and stable". Adobe ColdFusion is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, Oracle Application Express (APEX), GitHub CoPilot, Microsoft Azure App Service and ServiceNow, whereas Appian is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, OutSystems, Camunda, ServiceNow and Pega BPM. See our Adobe ColdFusion vs. Appian 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.