We performed a comparison between Boomi AtomSphere Flow and Microsoft Power Apps based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Low-Code Development Platforms solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution's most valuable feature is its core integration with Boomi AtomSphere because it's extremely easy to tap into any informational system of a company."
"Boomi AtomSphere Flow is very easy to develop and maintain compared to other tools like SAP HANA Cloud Integration or Cloud Platform."
"Boomi AtomSphere Flow is integrated through APIs, it exposes the API and any product can call the APIs in the queue. Additionally, it is secure."
"In the long run, if you have a good team, solution architect, and an architect from Boomi's side, then it is a good tool from an ROI perspective since it can help save money."
"Overall the solution is reliable."
"Microsoft PowerApps's most valuable features we found are that it's very similar to the other Microsoft products, you can do the basic automation quite quickly. The interface is similar to the other Microsoft products which makes it easy to navigate around because we are used to Microsoft products."
"We like that this solution allows us to fully define our test environments, and link them using different code. This means we can do different tests, but with one basic structure, and then export the data and use it in other platforms."
"You can easily connect Power Apps with other databases, like Excel, SharePoint, SQL, etc."
"Of all of the solutions I evaluated, it was the easiest to use and deploy."
"Overall, the tool is very democratic. It's easy for anyone to use. You don't have to be a professional or well-versed in technology."
"The flows are good because they can be used in a variety of situations."
"Ability to generate QR codes and scan barcodes."
"The development effort with Boomi AtomSphere Flow is more when you compare it with other tools, which is a drawback and an area of improvement."
"Its stability could be improved."
"The solution could improve by being more user-friendly. The whole solution is used through an interface and it could always be improved."
"The solution's user interface building needs improvement."
"Most of my training for what I do has been by watching or learning in the community. There needs to be better training on either one of these."
"Microsoft PowerApps is not responsive in nature."
"Microsoft should combine both the web and the mobile environment with all of the layers of development into one package."
"I would like to see more improvement, for example, in direct collaboration."
"It is not enough user friendly. It also doesn't integrate very well with SQL Server."
"Microsoft PowerApps can improve the number of bugs that are present. When you are using the different applications it is not accurate."
"We'd like to see more integration capabilities in the future."
"Microsoft PowerApps can be more costly for small teams or organizations."
Boomi AtomSphere Flow is ranked 17th in Low-Code Development Platforms with 4 reviews while Microsoft Power Apps is ranked 1st in Low-Code Development Platforms with 77 reviews. Boomi AtomSphere Flow is rated 8.0, while Microsoft Power Apps is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Boomi AtomSphere Flow writes "A competent solution for integrating enterprise-grade software". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Power Apps writes "Low-code, low learning curve, and reduces manpower". Boomi AtomSphere Flow is most compared with Apache Airflow, Camunda, Pega BPM, Mendix and AWS Step Functions, whereas Microsoft Power Apps is most compared with Mendix, Oracle Application Express (APEX), ServiceNow and Appian. See our Boomi AtomSphere Flow vs. Microsoft Power Apps report.
See our list of best Low-Code Development Platforms vendors.
We monitor all Low-Code 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.