Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Apache Web Server vs Magic xpa Application Platform comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 5, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Apache Web Server
Ranking in Application Infrastructure
4th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
23
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Magic xpa Application Platform
Ranking in Application Infrastructure
15th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
Application Server (9th), Mobile Development Platforms (10th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2025, in the Application Infrastructure category, the mindshare of Apache Web Server is 11.3%, up from 10.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Magic xpa Application Platform is 1.9%, up from 1.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Infrastructure Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Apache Web Server11.3%
Magic xpa Application Platform1.9%
Other86.8%
Application Infrastructure
 

Featured Reviews

Sanjay Sahu - PeerSpot reviewer
Secure connectivity and efficient software deployment with robust documentation
Apache Web Server effectively runs any web application, including Java-based applications. It includes Apache Tomcat server, which is crucial. We implement SSL to ensure secure connectivity. AI can enhance our tasks, such as extracting logs and identifying errors, and we are exploring implementing AI in this area. The server is known for its efficiency, stability, and free accessibility.
Mylsamy T. - PeerSpot reviewer
Enables us to develop more than 90 applications in-house, which are used across our organization
It's a bit difficult to work with purely web-based applications to get the data and display it. There have been a few times when the connection was disconnected between the server and your browser. The connectivity on browser-built applications needs to be improved. The mobile application development could be easier. They could include different external applications, like finger sensors. I'm not sure whether it's in version 3.8 or not.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The open-source nature is one of its most significant advantages."
"Most of the features I liked were related to the performance during peak hours."
"It is scalable."
"The product is very cheap and stable."
"The solution's most valuable feature is reporting."
"The solution offers good security."
"Apache Web Server is free of cost."
"The best thing about Apache is that it is open-source, so implementing my platform on-premises is less expansive than other solutions."
"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.)."
"xpa gives us a fast development speed."
"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 solution makes the managing and adapting of the software very easy."
"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."
"The ability to use the same development environment for both Windows and Android applications. Magic xpa also supports iOS applications."
"The best feature of Magic is the development time. The time it takes to develop something is incredibly fast if you compare Magic with, for example, Java."
"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."
 

Cons

"I want the user interface to be more user-friendly."
"By optimizing the infrastructure to allow the webserver to directly handle queries from memory—particularly by prioritizing the storage of queries in memory and processing them through the web server interface—I could potentially cut down the required instances from five hundred to two hundred."
"Lacks integration with some cloud solutions."
"The major issue occurs with ports. So, I would like to see easier port management."
"The GUI for the less experienced users needs some improvement. For some companies, it is hard to configure it if they have not had any experience."
"The product's initial setup process could be easier for users."
"It would be great if technical support for Apache were available in Iran. It is a very important need."
"Things change very fast. We're always on the lookout for better approaches and tools. If the solution falls behind, we may have to switch."
"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 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."
"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."
"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 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)."
"The user interface could be improved to be more friendly for developers."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is a free-of-cost solution."
"It is an open-source solution."
"There is no licensing cost for the product."
"The apache software is free, open-source."
"The licensing is too costly."
"The main problem with the Magic xpa Application Platform is pricing. You have to pay a lot of money for development, and you also have to pay a lot for the deployments and runtime, while in most competitors, you have to pay a lot for one of the two and not both."
"The cost for developers is high because you have to pay for licenses as well as runtime."
"My clients have to purchase additional licenses in order to use what I built. It's not a fair approach."
"It's not cheap. The licenses are not cheap. Not at all. They cost much money. There are other tools with free licenses but Magic asks for a lot of money."
"There are different licenses, we have the application and the online application. There are two different licenses for two different program sites for the Magic xpa Application Platform."
"Magic is not the cheapest IDE out there. If you are considering Magic xpa, you should do a cost-benefit analysis to feel comfortable with your decision. The Magic sales staff is very helpful in providing pricing."
"The licensing cost varies because nowadays Magic has tailor-made offerings for clients. I think the solution is worth the money."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Infrastructure solutions are best for your needs.
872,922 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
20%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Government
9%
University
6%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise10
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise1
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Apache Web Server?
The product's initial setup phase is straightforward.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Apache Web Server?
Apache Web Server is a free product, with no associated setup costs or licensing fees.
What needs improvement with Apache Web Server?
There is no need for substantial improvements as we have a dedicated team managing the server, ensuring everything runs smoothly.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Apache HTTP Server
uniPaaS
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Cisco, Intuit, General Electric, Adobe, VMware, PayPal, HP, EMC, eBay, Apple, SAP, Qualcomm, SanDisk, Allstate, FedEx
ADD, Cape plc, Adecco, Kuno Kinzoku Industry Co., GE Capital, Dove Tree, CBS Outdoor, Paris-Nord Villepinte Exhibition Center, Allstate Life Insurance Company, Titan Software Systems
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache Web Server vs. Magic xpa Application Platform and other solutions. Updated: November 2025.
872,922 professionals have used our research since 2012.