We performed a comparison between Appian and Knack based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Oracle, OutSystems and others in Rapid Application Development Software."The most valuable features are the low coding and low code data."
"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 has created executable requirements and speeds up the SDLC process greatly."
"Appian helps you do a lot of things. It's easy to configure and build an application platform, and it offers a lot of features that you find in an RPA solution. It's flexible so you can reuse it for a variety of use cases."
"Compared to other code tools that I've seen, Appian has a more robust rules engine"
"Appian's most valuable feature is that we can create end-to-end process workflows with minimum turnaround."
"It has good integrations. We were looking for out-of-the-box integration with both on-prem and publicly accessible data sources. We needed integration with the cloud, OData, our REST API feed, and then on-prem passthrough to go to a SQL database or on-prem APIs through Azure local deployment, etc."
"We appreciate the drag and drop functionality and the easy to access plug and play features."
"The security is the most valuable feature, in particular, the way I can give different access to different areas to different people, so you can really fine-tune access for different users."
"The graphical user interface could be easier to use. It should be simplified."
"I would like to see more complete university tools. For example, with UiPath, I have had a good experience related to a free course in order to provide some users some different levels of knowledge. This extra training helps users not only use the solution but to develop further within the tool."
"The biggest areas of improvement would be in facilitating team development, DevOps, and integration with typical tools used in enterprise development (Jenkins, Subversion, etc.)"
"I wouldn't say their response time is long, but it could be quicker."
"Appian could improve their customer-facing initiatives."
"We'd like improved functionality for testing new devices."
"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."
"Lacks integration with other products."
"The user interface for the systems that you build can use some improvement because as it is now, you have to do a lot of HTML and CSS to make it look modern."
Earn 20 points
Appian is ranked 6th in Rapid Application Development Software with 57 reviews while Knack is ranked 30th in Rapid Application Development Software. Appian is rated 8.4, while Knack is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Appian writes "Low resource consumption, easy setup, and stable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Knack writes "Flexible and granular security options, good filtering, and the pricing model is cost-effective". Appian is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, OutSystems, Camunda, ServiceNow and Pega BPM, whereas Knack is most compared with Caspio, Microsoft Power Apps, Salesforce Platform, Amazon AWS and AppSheet.
See our list of best Rapid Application Development Software 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.