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."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."
"We save enormous amounts of time in development using this tool."
"No need to import libraries from outside the environment."
"I would like to say that its best feature is its different kinds of connectors. We have lots of in-built connectors."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"The agile manner that we require to create our workflows. This is probably the most critical part of our solution and the time it takes to start processing the solution."
"It is really simple to create a new app, and I like the data-centric aspect of the BPM tool."
"With low-code, we don't need a lot of coding, and then from the plumbing perspective, there is a complete CI/CD pipeline that exists within Appian that can be leveraged for open deployment."
"Call Web Service Smart Service - Web service integrations with other systems are super simple and fast to create, supported by low code menus."
"Write to Data Store Entity - Saving data in SQL databases is done easily using entities. Entities (CDTs in Appian terminology) define relationships and target schema tables via XSD files."
"The most valuable features of Appian are workflow management and the ease with which you can build the UI."
"It has very flexible adaptation and the ability to save and automate processes."
"Good workflow engines that bridge the gaps of processes."
"There is not much third party authenticators in this solution"
"Need to be able to Be able to inject Python, Java, Groovy, or PHP code into a CFML page."
"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."
"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."
"Installation of the server software was formidable due the number of configurable options."
"They should provide more flexibility so designers can create a more picture perfect device."
"Sometimes, clients expect us to implement ERP using Appian, which is very complicated. In such cases, I don't believe that Appian is a good tool for that."
"Appian is easy to set up, but JBoss is complex. JBoss is the application server for running Appian."
"Even though the company has made great improvements in online documentation, featuring rich material which includes case studies of real-life use cases, the material could definitely be better in quality and coverage of use cases."
"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 reporting is not as good as in similar products. They could also improve the dashboards."
"What could be improved is more on the front end perspective, like the user interface and the mobile application aspect."
"Offline capabilities and responsive capabilities could be better. The mobility features of Appian platform are still evolving."
Adobe ColdFusion is ranked 20th in Rapid Application Development Software with 6 reviews while Appian is ranked 6th in Rapid Application Development Software with 56 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 Oracle Application Express (APEX), Microsoft Azure App Service, Microsoft Power Apps, GitHub CoPilot 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.