We performed a comparison between Appian and AWS Step Functions based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Business Process Management (BPM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable features are the low coding and low code data."
"The application life cycle is very clear. I started learning it and giving some workshops to my team. Creating the users and the building is very structured. Documentation is nice and it's easy to learn."
"Low code development: Code can be developed pretty quickly which leads to less turnaround time for automation of business processes."
"SAIL (Self-Assembling Interface Layer), a scripting language provided by Appian. It is the equivalent of JS and CSS. It allows creation of complex UIs which are also responsive. With SAIL, we have a single language for both the UI logic and its appearance. UI components can be built as reusable components and used in multiple UI interfaces."
"It reduces development time in half making us more efficient."
"It has good integrations. We were looking for out-of-the-box integration with both on-prem and publicly accessible data sources. We needed integration with the cloud, OData, our REST API feed, and then on-prem passthrough to go to a SQL database or on-prem APIs through Azure local deployment, etc."
"In terms of interface, it's very good. In terms of infrastructure, it's amazing and already using multiple tools behind the scenes. It's a low-code platform, so it's very easy to implement."
"We appreciate the drag and drop functionality and the easy to access plug and play features."
"The number of historical events is great."
"It's Amazon, it's scalable."
"AWS Step Functions acts as a high-level layer, allowing us to seamlessly integrate with microservices."
"It is a scalable solution."
"What I like the most about Amazon Step Functions is how easy it is to use."
"The solution is stable...The solution is easy to scale."
"It's a general solution that you can adapt to your own needs and is simple to use. We like that it can be integrated with everything in the AWS suite, and that the creation of the pipeline can be done using the graphical user interface."
"One can rate all the calls and that is a good feature."
"The performance is pretty good, but the distortions need to be optimized in order for it to work well."
"If we could calculate the amount of data that will be realized, it would help us a lot."
"A point of improvement would be the SAIL forms. The built-in tool used to generate forms does not have debugging support (to view local variables as they change on live preview, and step-by-step valuation) which is a big drawback for form development. Moreover, the script language used to build SAIL forms does not support inheritance or lambda expressions (functions as arguments of other functions), which makes the code base more verbose."
"Appian could improve their customer-facing initiatives."
"Architecture of product and scalabiility issues."
"It has it's own built-in UI components and doesn't provide much flexibility to customize or extend those components."
"It would be useful if they could create an academy or forum in the future to help active users answer questions they have about the solution."
"The graphical user interface could be easier to use. It should be simplified."
"The price and support are areas with shortcomings where the solution needs to improve."
"The pricing of the solution can be improved."
"The solution's data size limit can be improved."
"It wasn't easy to understand the licensing model. It's like if you use just a little, it's cheap, but it becomes more expensive as you use more. It's like a hook that ties you inside the Amazon ecosystem. So, it creates a dependency."
"The interface can sometimes feel limited, as we're unable to see what AWS is running behind the scenes."
"Setup took about one day. We had some errors to understand in the beginning, but now everything is working good."
"I would like to see more data transformation features in Amazon Step Functions like additional operators and logic."
"It is hard to coordinate the declaratory language."
Appian is ranked 4th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 57 reviews while AWS Step Functions is ranked 12th in Business Process Management (BPM) with 8 reviews. Appian is rated 8.4, while AWS Step Functions is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Appian writes "Low resource consumption, easy setup, and stable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of AWS Step Functions writes "Simplifies complex task automation and enhances development workflows while offering user-friendly interface, seamless scalability and efficient workflow orchestration". Appian is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, OutSystems, Camunda, ServiceNow and Pega BPM, whereas AWS Step Functions is most compared with Camunda, IBM BPM, Apache Airflow, Pega BPM and Oracle BPM. See our AWS Step Functions vs. Appian report.
See our list of best Business Process Management (BPM) vendors.
We monitor all Business Process Management (BPM) 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.
