We performed a comparison between Magic xpa Application Platform and Tomcat based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Server solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."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 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."
"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."
"The Magic xpa Application Platform is very suitable for production since it is easy to update. The program is simple to upgrade and deploy. The solution is convenient in production. You need to adjust the data, then adjust the program which is not difficult."
"The ability to use the same development environment for both Windows and Android applications. Magic xpa also supports iOS applications."
"The speed of development is the quickest for any tool on the market."
"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."
"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."
"The product's initial setup phase was simple."
"It is easy to set up."
"We chose to use Tomcat because it's perfect compared to other containers that we have tested."
"The product's most valuable feature is the ability to host applications."
"I love Tomcat for its scalability, reliability, availability, and steadiness."
"It is a robust solution."
"Tomcat is user-friendly and easy to set up, especially compared to WebLogic or JBoss where some specialty is required. If you are going for Tomcat, you can use their guidelines and can set it up easily."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is that it supports Java Enterprise."
"There is room for improvement in Magic's marketing and licensing. I would like to see more integration of web functionality."
"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."
"The ability to display page up, page down, top and bottom buttons along the scroll bar would make my mouse-reliant customers happy."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"Support is very bad."
"The solution's interface and backup features could be better."
"Tomcat needs to improve its stability."
"Technical support is limited."
"The product's pricing needs improvement."
"Tomcat is not user-friendly. I would also like to be able to have multiple applications run at the same time."
"In the solution, we are using the terminal to enter command line codes for operations and management, this is difficult for me. It would be better if we had some administrator UI tools for this."
"I would also like to see a dashboard with some integrations in order to see the logs and trace performance easier."
"Tomcat needs to improve its user interface."
More Magic xpa Application Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
Magic xpa Application Platform is ranked 7th in Application Server with 10 reviews while Tomcat is ranked 2nd in Application Server with 42 reviews. Magic xpa Application Platform is rated 8.6, while Tomcat is rated 8.2. 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 Tomcat writes "A lightweight tool that offers efficiency in terms of memory and resource usage". Magic xpa Application Platform is most compared with Microsoft .NET Framework, Mendix, OutSystems and GeneXus, whereas Tomcat is most compared with Oracle WebLogic Server, JBoss, IBM WebSphere Application Server, IIS and Caucho Resin. See our Magic xpa Application Platform vs. Tomcat report.
See our list of best Application Server vendors.
We monitor all Application Server 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.