We performed a comparison between Magic xpa Application Platform and SAP NetWeaver Enterprise Portal based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, F5, Apache and others in Application Infrastructure."Magic’s Database Gateway allows the logic of the program to be isolated from the underlying database. This provides the flexibility not only to move existing programs to different database environments without the need to change the logic in the program but also allows the programmer access to different databases without the need to know how to "talk" to them."
"The ability to use the same development environment for both Windows and Android applications. Magic xpa also supports iOS applications."
"xpa gives us a fast development speed."
"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."
"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."
"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.)."
"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."
"Speed of development and database connectivity (MS SQL, Oracle, DB2, Btrieve/Pervasive PSQL, ODBC, MySql, and SQLite)."
"Internal workflow approval around ESS and MSS leave days, capex approval as well as internal communication to the business have improved the way my organization functions."
"From the use of this solution, we have been able to establish better processes and have greater management of our company."
"Workflow functionality and internal portal capabilities are the most important features."
"They integrated it with the SAP router."
"Support is very bad."
"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."
"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)."
"It is missing basic charting tools for bar/pie/series charts. It is left to the developer to acquire and deploy charting tools or the customer to purchase a third-party reporting tool to produce charts."
"In the next version of the Magic xpa Application Platform, I want tables or small programs where I can directly add expressions. I can do it on SQL, but it would make life much easier if that specification were added to the platform."
"The ability to display page up, page down, top and bottom buttons along the scroll bar would make my mouse-reliant customers happy."
"They want to be one toolbox for everything, but primarily, we are using xpa to develop desktop applications, and in that area they're lacking functionalities, flexibility, and modern stuff."
"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."
"We encountered stability issues, especially on external functionality around its RFP capabilities."
"Our customers expect that a page will open within one second, and I doubt this will happen. Also, opening documentation takes time. Fixing this will help the customer and help to meet their expectations."
"The user interface could be improved by making it more user-friendly."
"Due to our business, some setups were very complex."
"External portal functionality with suppliers and customers needs improvement."
More Magic xpa Application Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
More SAP NetWeaver Enterprise Portal Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Magic xpa Application Platform is ranked 14th in Application Infrastructure with 10 reviews while SAP NetWeaver Enterprise Portal is ranked 21st in Application Infrastructure. Magic xpa Application Platform is rated 8.6, while SAP NetWeaver Enterprise Portal is rated 8.0. 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". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SAP NetWeaver Enterprise Portal writes "The UI makes the setup easy to do from anywhere". Magic xpa Application Platform is most compared with Microsoft .NET Framework, Mendix, OutSystems and GeneXus, whereas SAP NetWeaver Enterprise Portal is most compared with Microsoft .NET Framework, NGINX Plus, Apache Web Server, IBM DataPower Gateway and IBM WebSphere Application Server.
See our list of best Application Infrastructure vendors.
We monitor all Application Infrastructure 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.