We performed a comparison between Appian and Temenos Quantum 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."It has created executable requirements and speeds up the SDLC process greatly."
"Process culture is making noise inside the organization because now, everybody knows that their time is being monitored."
"The most valuable feature is business automation."
"Technical support is quite responsive."
"Technical support has been amazing overall."
"It has very flexible adaptation and the ability to save and automate processes."
"What I found most valuable in Appian is that it lets you drill down on multiple things through the structure of the reporting and UI side. It's also low-code, yet it results in quick deliverables."
"In terms of interface, it's very good. In terms of infrastructure, it's amazing and already using multiple tools behind the scenes. It's a low-code platform, so it's very easy to implement."
"The main benefit lies in its exceptional speed of implementation."
"The most valuable features of Temenos Quantum are user-friendliness and customizability."
"Its greatest advantage lies in its exceptional security and robustness."
"With the new VM releases, it is a faster product with more abilities that benefit the user."
"You can build your own customized, native, mobile applications in an efficient matter."
"The best thing about Temenos Quantum is how it smoothly connects with Temenos Fabric. This simplifies our quantum application by handling identity, authentication, and security tasks seamlessly, saving us from extra coding."
"The best feature is the Kony Studio, which is the product that is used to develop interfaces."
"The initial setup of Temenos Quantum was easy."
"Offline capabilities and responsive capabilities could be better. The mobility features of Appian platform are still evolving."
"If that had more DevOps capabilities, it would be an excellent product."
"I wouldn't say their response time is long, but it could be quicker."
"There are some restrictions with respect to using external components within Appian. So, for example, if we do not have a particular feature available, there's a long cycle of getting approvals and all of that. That does not offer flexibility, which definitely can be improved on."
"It would be useful if they could create an academy or forum in the future to help active users answer questions they have about the solution."
"A point of improvement would be the SAIL forms. The built-in tool used to generate forms does not have debugging support (to view local variables as they change on live preview, and step-by-step valuation) which is a big drawback for form development. Moreover, the script language used to build SAIL forms does not support inheritance or lambda expressions (functions as arguments of other functions), which makes the code base more verbose."
"It is difficult to set up the on-premise version."
"Native mobile capabilities or hybrid mobile app capabilities are very limited. Things like offline sync, offline storage, access to smartphone device features, etc. are not supported by the Appian platform yet."
"It would be highly beneficial if future iterations of Temenos could incorporate support for QR-based payment methods, as it would enhance the platform's capabilities and align it more closely with modern payment trends"
"The technology of the solution needs an update. It is deficient in terms of connectivity."
"When developing our application, we also encountered certain issues related to delays and time-consuming builds."
"Some features are only enabled for paid users. It would be much better if they enabled those features without having to pay. I would also like to see them publish information about future technologies on the Home screen under a separate tab. That would be an improvement."
"Using the API manager can be complicated when you're dealing with multiple teams, projects, and APIs. Quantum doesn't have user-based access, so I can't restrict parts of the project to specific users."
"The UI lacks flexibility, especially regarding customizations. There are numerous issues at the fabric end, and working with the visualizer is extremely challenging. Basic development tasks require a high-end machine, and even clicking on an icon initiates a thirty-second processing time. The challenges mainly revolve around fabric and content."
"One area where Temenos Quantum could improve is in the flexibility of widgets and additional libraries."
"Temenos Quantum is not quite stable yet."
Appian is ranked 6th in Rapid Application Development Software with 57 reviews while Temenos Quantum is ranked 18th in Rapid Application Development Software with 15 reviews. Appian is rated 8.4, while Temenos Quantum is rated 7.2. The top reviewer of Appian writes "Low resource consumption, easy setup, and stable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Temenos Quantum writes "Though a secure tool for building applications, there is a need to improve its stability". Appian is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, OutSystems, Camunda, ServiceNow and Pega BPM, whereas Temenos Quantum is most compared with OutSystems, ServiceNow, Mendix and Microsoft Azure App Service. See our Appian vs. Temenos Quantum 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.
