We performed a comparison between Appian and Microsoft Powerapps based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison of Results: Based on the parameters we compared, Microsoft Powerapps seems to be the superior solution. Our reviewers find that Appian’s need for integration improvement makes Microsoft Powerapps the better choice.
"Process culture is making noise inside the organization because now, everybody knows that their time is being monitored."
"What stands out are the speed of the product, the quick, easy development, and visual diagramming."
"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."
"SAIL (Self-Assembling Interface Layer), a scripting language provided by Appian. It is the equivalent of JS and CSS. It allows creation of complex UIs which are also responsive. With SAIL, we have a single language for both the UI logic and its appearance. UI components can be built as reusable components and used in multiple UI interfaces."
"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."
"There is no need to worry about vulnerabilities in the system, because Appian built a secure system."
"It reduces development time in half making us more efficient."
"It allows us to provide all the information in one single place."
"As a business person, I design a lot of screens. The solution really resonates with me. Their design is amazing."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the Model-driven or Canvas application-making platforms. The power of the two gives us exactly what we are looking for."
"The cloud aspect has been great. We don't have to do a lot of research in order to begin integrations. It's so easy to integrate with other solutions."
"The support is the most valuable feature."
"It is easy to use."
"It is very easy for us to implement. We have a Microsoft ecosystem, and this solution has many components for integration."
"Of all of the solutions I evaluated, it was the easiest to use and deploy."
"We'd like improved functionality for testing new devices."
"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."
"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."
"The ability of the interface to load automatic data is not great."
"The documentation needs to be improved."
"One of the areas that Appian is working on is to improve its UI capabilities and give more flexibility to the UI."
"The solution could use some more tutorials to help brand new users figure out how to use the product effectively."
"Appian could include other applications that we could reuse for other customers, CRM for example."
"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."
"It would be beneficial to have a feature that allows users to split the opportunity into separate logs for each product."
"Microsoft could streamline monitoring and management. In addition, it should be easier to put the solution in different environments. For example, you should be able to move from a dev environment to a production environment seamlessly."
"Can be improved to cater to complex developments."
"We'd like more features and less to no coding."
"Improvements to the capturing of geographic locations and integration with maps would raise my score of the product from seven point five to its maximum of ten."
"In my experience, the solution's deployment can be tricky."
Appian is ranked 6th in Rapid Application Development Software with 58 reviews while Microsoft Power Apps is ranked 1st in Rapid Application Development Software with 78 reviews. Appian is rated 8.4, while Microsoft Power Apps is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Appian writes "Low resource consumption, easy setup, and stable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Power Apps writes "Low-code, low learning curve, and reduces manpower". Appian is most compared with Camunda, ServiceNow, OutSystems, Pega BPM and Mendix, whereas Microsoft Power Apps is most compared with Oracle Application Express (APEX), Mendix, ServiceNow, Microsoft Azure App Service and Salesforce Platform. See our Appian 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.