We performed a comparison between Mendix and Pillir based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Oracle, OutSystems and others in Rapid Application Development Software."They are leading in the smart manufacturing, and connectivity space."
"It's amazing that you can build web apps and mobile (hybrid) apps with one code base in a few clicks. It's a full continuous integration environment."
"What I like best about Mendix is that it's leading the way for low-code, no-code platforms compared to other solutions in the market."
"The most valuable features are the integration and UI customization."
"The solution is stable."
"The user experience is great."
"Enables us to rapidly create a complex application. We are also able to customize features that stakeholders in the corporation want to see, something that could not be done with other software. Our workflows and processes have evolved and improved. The fast iterations allow us to be nimble, get feedback from users, and do rapid updates."
"The most valuable features of the product are its ease of use and speed. My friend and I find it helpful as a team of just two developers."
"I believe that this is the only product in the market that truly supports offline capabilities in an SAP environment."
"I love how they took the MIT Scratch concept and implemented it into the in-app backend. It makes the app creation so much more intuitive and easy to use."
"A constraint of Mendix is that you have to look for the required plugins which takes up development time. There are a limited number of Mendix experts in the market."
"Overall, integration with the enterprise ecosystem needs improvement."
"Mendix is great for internal applications but not so great for a public-facing interface. It lacks a proper directory structure for public use. The URL will not change from page to page unless a deep link is created for each page. That makes it difficult to bookmark pages in the browser to view later on."
"We'd like to be able to write in C Sharp to develop code for Mendix."
"There needs to be an increase in the number of the UI components."
"Needs multiple database connections so an app can directly read/write data to/from multiple databases. This would enable easy splitting of big applications that have complex entity relationships."
"You need experienced programmers and developers to understand this solution."
"The code refactoring tools could be better, especially for applications running for years. It's not bad, but it could be smoother. Also, writing new widgets can be trickier than it should be for some people, but not if you're familiar with Mendix."
"While we're not in a place of letting LOB analysts build apps, at some point, we may want to give them a bit more freedom - as long as we can limit their ability to harm the ERP data. I would like to see more tools pertaining to this area."
"The modernizer element should convert a higher percentage of the ABAP code, moving it from approximately 75%, closer to 100%."
Earn 20 points
Mendix is ranked 5th in Rapid Application Development Software with 48 reviews while Pillir is ranked 41st in Rapid Application Development Software. Mendix is rated 8.4, while Pillir is rated 10.0. The top reviewer of Mendix writes "Low-code, helpful support, and great native mobile capability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Pillir writes "Helpful dashboard, supports offline capabilities for SAP, professional support, and a simple pricing model". Mendix is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, OutSystems, Appian, Oracle Application Express (APEX) and ServiceNow, whereas Pillir is most compared with .
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.