"I think it's the best content management system, fulfilling all the requirements of a CMS tool."
"I have found Adobe Experience Manager Mobile to be reliable."
"One thing I like about OutSystems is that there's no lock-in. You can keep running your applications because it's on .NET and hosted centrally. That's one of the advantages I see there in terms of not having an IT strategy that has a dependency on a particular platform."
"The scratch coding is useful. The solution is easy to understand."
"It is a stable solution, and the initial setup is straightforward."
"OutSystems is easy to use."
"The architecture of OutSystems is quite simple, and the features are similar to Mendix's. OutSystems has connectors for different enterprise apps and solid reporting capabilities. You can also integrate with any content management platform like SharePoint or Adobe Enterprise Manager, or something like that. You can also create and integrate workflows."
"We have no complaints surrounding both the scalability and stability of this solution."
"The scalability of OutSystems is very good, it scales automatically very useful for us."
"It is easy to use."
"The license cost is too high, and customers hesitate to implement this solution."
"Adobe Experience Manager Mobile could be improved by making it much easier to share the design system between different projects."
"One of the biggest areas for improvement is that every time an existing data element is modified, it creates a new data element. It doesn't really modify that particular data element. So, a user has to follow an extra step of removing the existing data element and bringing in the new and modified data element that is being added, which sort of goes into negative productivity."
"OutSystems could improve by being more like GitHub. It would be more helpful for us for division management and version control for our application."
"We'd like OutSystems to add stronger workflow-based automation similar to what Appian offers. It needs more workflow modeling and RPA features."
"It's difficult to do the component version control. I would like them to add more studying materials."
"The prices should be lower. It is a little bit too high for a small market."
"Since we first started using OutSystems, they switched their language support from Java and .NET to .NET only, which was a bit of a surprise. Their language support could be better in this sense, although on our resource side it is now a bit more flexible."
"The technical features are good, but the actual commercialization is out of reach."
"There are not enough resources on the market."
More Adobe Experience Manager Mobile [EOL] Pricing and Cost Advice →
Adobe Experience Manager Mobile [EOL] is ranked unranked in Mobile Development Platforms with 2 reviews while OutSystems is ranked 3rd in Mobile Development Platforms with 14 reviews. Adobe Experience Manager Mobile [EOL] is rated 7.6, while OutSystems is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Adobe Experience Manager Mobile [EOL] writes "Reliable, beneficial data flows, but design system sharing needs improvement". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OutSystems writes "Helps with validation, offers good features, and is reliable". Adobe Experience Manager Mobile [EOL] is most compared with , whereas OutSystems is most compared with Microsoft PowerApps, Mendix, ServiceNow, Appian and Oracle Application Express (APEX).
See our list of best Mobile Development Platforms vendors.
We monitor all Mobile 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.
