We performed a comparison between AgilePoint and Microsoft Power Apps 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."The solution's workflows are its most useful feature."
"AgilePoint's most valuable feature is process management."
"The initial setup of AgilePoint was very easy."
"AgilePoint has improved our organization by making form implementation easier and to plan for future growth."
"I like the design and the integration capacity. It's also easy to use."
"I would say that the most valuable features are the user interface, navigation, and business routes."
"It offers integration with several Microsoft products, including SharePoint and Outlook, in my opinion, is a huge plus."
"The most valuable feature is that PowerApps can be used by most business users. It is not only for programmers."
"The most valuable features are low-code and fast development."
"Generating reports is very fast with Microsoft PowerApps. It's stable and scalable as well."
"The model that allows you to establish flow automation is getting a lot of traction from the customer side. It offers a lot of flexibility."
"The solution is excellent at figuring how to build an application in three months. It makes it very quick and easy."
"Flexibility, easy setup, and fairly quick results are valuable features of the product."
"The solution should be able to support Docker. This would help make scalability easier."
"It could be more flexible, but it's already a good solution for the designer."
"Some issues with AgilePoint's design, AI and UX are some of the major problems we deal with when handling our company's business models or processes."
"They should add more information about functionality."
"While the platform is good and it has a lot of options, I would like to see more alternative features in future versions such as connectors to IDM. Currently, they have only ADFS and Okta."
"You can't add too many filters onto anything you build, otherwise, it will be very slow and it will affect your performance."
"One of the major problems with it is what PowerApps calls the delegation warning. Regardless of what platform, data source, et cetera, that you're using, you can't retrieve more than 2000 records."
"The solution should move to the next step in its maturity model and include mobile versions for Android and iOS."
"The product could be improved by making it a production application and enabling the export of apps."
"Customization is somewhat complicated."
"I would like to see more improvement, for example, in direct collaboration."
"It's sometimes hard to import groups of options. At this point, I need to enter those manually and it slows the process down."
"The solution needs a bit more refinement in general."
AgilePoint is ranked 23rd in Rapid Application Development Software with 5 reviews while Microsoft Power Apps is ranked 1st in Rapid Application Development Software with 78 reviews. AgilePoint is rated 8.0, while Microsoft Power Apps is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of AgilePoint writes " An affordable tool to create workflows requiring an easy initial setup phase". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Power Apps writes "Low-code, low learning curve, and reduces manpower". AgilePoint is most compared with Mendix, OutSystems, Nintex Process Platform, Camunda and ServiceNow Now Platform, whereas Microsoft Power Apps is most compared with Oracle Application Express (APEX), Mendix, ServiceNow, Appian and Microsoft Azure App Service. See our AgilePoint 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.