What is our primary use case?
We switched to Magic xpa because in the old fashioned version we were at the end and we had to buy a new SS. In the old fashioned Magic, we didn't have the opportunity to have browser controls, to send or receive emails, communicate with external resources, and so on. With xpa, we have that ability.
How has it helped my organization?
Magic is rapid, it's a tool which we use to develop, change and maintain our programs. xpa has a lot more features onboard and it gives us the opportunity to do such things so that we can easily adapt and maintain our programs. It gives certain benefits to stay with our customers and the market.
What is most valuable?
It's a product we know but they use modern tools and give us the ability to connect with the world outside Magic. For us, it's more internet applications, not so much the mobile thing. We also like the web service and the ability to communicate with other systems. In the old fashioned version we had to work with text files and so on, and now we can use the XML. It has the ability to create XML in an easier way.
What needs improvement?
When you have several tasks, you open a screen in a subtask in developing mode, then you don't see the parent screens.
Debugging .NET snippets is not possible, so it lacks the effects to solve problems. First you have to write and test your .NET code in VS. Then you have to copy the .NET code in Magic XPA because there is almost nothing to debug it.
For how long have I used the solution?
One to three years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
The older versions are more stable. They have a lot of upgrades. We don't have too much trouble with them, but it's very difficult to create a very stable database. We have other things that influence Magic. Sometimes when there are problems and we look deeper into the issue, we see that it's the developer's fault. Where we have problems is sometimes in printing and connecting to other things, and sometimes it's the underlying operating system doesn't always work on Windows. The VCO also differs between Windows 7 and Windows 10. The behavior is sometimes different. Due to that, it's not always ready.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
We don't have a lot of problems with scalability. They say it's very scalable, but there are things we really don't use, don't apply, or don't have a lot of experience with. I don't have a lot of experience with scalability.
How are customer service and technical support?
We have a contract with their technical support but we don't always use it. The users' group in my opinion is better. With technical support when you have a problem, you have to say the problem, give examples, and sources. It's too much overlay. Users groups try to solve the problem, and most of all, you get the answer there for the problem.
How was the initial setup?
The initial setup was not so easy. We skipped a number of versions and applied a lot of things that were new in our version, in our software, that we didn't before. When we first began, it took a lot of time to learn how to do things and it wasn't so easy. It was a lot of very tough thinking and programming. In the old version of Magic, version 7, it was more programming. Now it's more event-driven. It's easier to maintain than before.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
It's not cheap.
The licenses are not cheap. Not at all. They cost much money. There are other tools with free licenses but Magic asks for a lot of money.
What other advice do I have?
I would rate this solution a nine out of ten. A ten is for something that is perfect and nothing is perfect. I would recommend this product but if you want a cheap product, this solution is not that. A lot of programmers must be Java or .NET. and use Magic for creating database-driven applications. Magic has a lot of advantages. We work with database applications and for our use, Magic is a very good product.