We performed a comparison between Boomi AtomSphere Flow and Microsoft Power Apps based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Low-Code Development Platforms solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution's most valuable feature is its core integration with Boomi AtomSphere because it's extremely easy to tap into any informational system of a company."
"In the long run, if you have a good team, solution architect, and an architect from Boomi's side, then it is a good tool from an ROI perspective since it can help save money."
"Boomi AtomSphere Flow is integrated through APIs, it exposes the API and any product can call the APIs in the queue. Additionally, it is secure."
"Boomi AtomSphere Flow is very easy to develop and maintain compared to other tools like SAP HANA Cloud Integration or Cloud Platform."
"Generating reports is very fast with Microsoft PowerApps. It's stable and scalable as well."
"The support is the most valuable feature."
"Ability to generate QR codes and scan barcodes."
"Flexibility, easy setup, and fairly quick results are valuable features of the product."
"You can easily connect Power Apps with other databases, like Excel, SharePoint, SQL, etc."
"There is value in being able to collect and compare information in real-time to present alternatives for correcting vulnerabilities."
"For our purposes, it is quite scalable."
"The solution is very straightforward. Its context is obvious and everything is easy to understand."
"The solution could improve by being more user-friendly. The whole solution is used through an interface and it could always be improved."
"The solution's user interface building needs improvement."
"The development effort with Boomi AtomSphere Flow is more when you compare it with other tools, which is a drawback and an area of improvement."
"Its stability could be improved."
"You can't add too many filters onto anything you build, otherwise, it will be very slow and it will affect your performance."
"The fact that we couldn't share that with our other organization or outside of the organization, consisting of our colleagues in the joint ventures, was a weakness of the solution."
"I recommend improving Microsoft Power Apps' licensing model. I've encountered challenges related to licensing complexity, which has led some customers to opt for traditional solution development and deployment methods instead."
"Installation and integration could be improved."
"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."
"PowerApps is still a bit new compared to a slightly more mature product such as OutSystems."
"The flexibility of the user interface could be better."
"The pricing structure needs to be improved, the current information is confusing."
Boomi AtomSphere Flow is ranked 20th in Low-Code Development Platforms with 4 reviews while Microsoft Power Apps is ranked 1st in Low-Code Development Platforms with 78 reviews. Boomi AtomSphere Flow is rated 8.0, while Microsoft Power Apps is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Boomi AtomSphere Flow writes "A competent solution for integrating enterprise-grade software". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Power Apps writes "Low-code, low learning curve, and reduces manpower". Boomi AtomSphere Flow is most compared with Apache Airflow, Camunda, Pega BPM, Mendix and AWS Step Functions, whereas Microsoft Power Apps is most compared with Oracle Application Express (APEX), Mendix, ServiceNow, Appian and Microsoft Azure App Service. See our Boomi AtomSphere Flow vs. Microsoft Power Apps report.
See our list of best Low-Code Development Platforms 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.