We performed a comparison between Adobe Experience Manager Mobile [EOL] and Magic xpa Application Platform based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about OutSystems, Mendix, Salesforce and others in Mobile Development Platforms."I think it's the best content management system, fulfilling all the requirements of a CMS tool."
"I have found Adobe Experience Manager Mobile to be reliable."
"Magic’s unique approach to development ensures that the programmer stays focused on the objective of the program (i.e. display all customers in California), instead of the repetitive tasks that surround it (i.e. connect to database, open customers table, create the query to retrieve records within the specified criteria, fetch the result of the query, connect it to a data grid, etc.)."
"xpa gives us a fast development speed."
"Being able to make changes to existing programs to comply with last minute changes in requirements, and/or being able to fix, test, review, and deploy new code in a manner of hours instead of days, definitely gives us a huge advantage over our competitors and this is only possible thanks to Magic’s speed of programming."
"The solution makes the managing and adapting of the software very easy."
"The ability to use the same development environment for both Windows and Android applications. Magic xpa also supports iOS applications."
"Typically an experienced Magic developer can do the work of two to three experienced C#/.NET developers. Customers are amazed at how quickly most new features can be added and bug fixes implemented. I have worked for four employers - including myself - using Magic, and in most instances, bug fixes are addressed and deployed in under six hours."
"Without the need to compile code, the time spent in the development cycle is greatly reduced, allowing the programmer to test modifications to a program immediately after they have been saved."
"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."
"The license cost is too high, and customers hesitate to implement this solution."
"Adobe Experience Manager Mobile could be improved by making it much easier to share the design system between different projects."
"Throughout my career, I've encountered difficulties when integrating new technologies with Magic xpa Application Platform. In particular, when attempting to incorporate features from other development languages into earlier versions of the solution called uniPaaS. I struggled to integrate .NET components due to the limited options available. This made the process more challenging and complicated. I find it challenging to create a more user-friendly experience for users who may be comparing the system to other systems they have used outside or within the company on different platforms."
"Support is very bad."
"Magic has a tradition, when it adds new technologies/features to the Magic development tool, to provide either no documentation or documentation that does not provide an organized approach for bringing this new technology/feature to experienced Magic programmers."
"The configuration of the xpa RIA mobile environment is complex and a discouragement to new developers. Also, Magic's documentation can be less than complete at times which leads to frustration for new developers. (I encourage new Magic developers to join the Magic Users Group)."
"The user interface could be improved to be more friendly for developers."
"I would like to see a spell checker included with optional language support. Currently, this has to be purchased from a third-party."
"The Android environment is missing a number of functions for file/folder manipulation, sending receiving text messages (SMS) and the menuing options are limited. For now, it is left to the developer to write his/her own Java functions to include in the APK."
"When you have several tasks, you open a screen in a task in developing mode, and you don't see the parent screens. Debugging lacks the effects to solve problems. You have to do it first in a kind of studio. Then you have to be sure that you can do it in Magic because there is almost nothing to debug it. It's practically impossible to debug. You have to be sure before you put your snippets."
More Adobe Experience Manager Mobile [EOL] Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Magic xpa Application Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
Adobe Experience Manager Mobile [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Mobile Development Platforms with 2 reviews while Magic xpa Application Platform is ranked 11th in Mobile Development Platforms with 10 reviews. Adobe Experience Manager Mobile [EOL] is rated 7.6, while Magic xpa Application Platform is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Adobe Experience Manager Mobile [EOL] writes "Fulfills all the requirements of a CMS tool and is stable and scalable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Magic xpa Application Platform writes "Fast development and user-oriented functionalities, but it needs better .NET integration and a completely different pricing structure". Adobe Experience Manager Mobile [EOL] is most compared with , whereas Magic xpa Application Platform is most compared with Microsoft .NET Framework, Mendix, OutSystems and GeneXus.
See our list of best Mobile Development Platforms vendors.
We monitor all Mobile 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.
