We performed a comparison between Appian and FortressIQ based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Celonis, UiPath, Automation Anywhere and others in Process Mining."What stands out are the speed of the product, the quick, easy development, and visual diagramming."
"With low-code, we don't need a lot of coding, and then from the plumbing perspective, there is a complete CI/CD pipeline that exists within Appian that can be leveraged for open deployment."
"The low code functionality and being able to get applications faster to customers or to the market are valuable."
"The most productive aspect of Appian lies in its ability to develop interfaces, particularly user interfaces. Creating user interfaces is highly productive, when these interfaces are integrated with the original database. In such cases, using record types proves to be a very efficient method of handling data. The synergy between interfaces and record types enhances productivity."
"It has very flexible adaptation and the ability to save and automate processes."
"Appian's most valuable feature is that we can create end-to-end process workflows with minimum turnaround."
"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."
"Another advantage of this tool is its reports and records. You can maintain dashboards, layouts. If you with a Java solution, it takes six months time. If you use this tool, you can finish in one or one and a half months' time."
"The process mining capability of the solution is valuable."
"The support is responsive and reliable."
"There could be a scope of enhancement for capturing the variety of use cases."
"Lacks integration with other products."
"Sometimes, clients expect us to implement ERP using Appian, which is very complicated. In such cases, I don't believe that Appian is a good tool for that."
"Native mobile capabilities or hybrid mobile app capabilities are very limited. Things like offline sync, offline storage, access to smartphone device features, etc. are not supported by the Appian platform yet."
"It is difficult to set up the on-premise version."
"The solution could improve robotic process automation."
"We have clients that want to use Office 365, Microsoft Analytics, and Power Apps. Appian just isn't the same as using something specifically designed to cater to the Microsoft Suite."
"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."
"The way the commercial model of the product is structured must be improved."
"Another aspect that needs improvement is the domain definition."
Appian is ranked 5th in Process Mining with 58 reviews while FortressIQ is ranked 9th in Process Mining with 2 reviews. Appian is rated 8.4, while FortressIQ is rated 4.0. The top reviewer of Appian writes "Low resource consumption, easy setup, and stable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of FortressIQ writes "The product has good process mining capabilities, but it is very expensive". Appian is most compared with Microsoft Power Apps, OutSystems, Camunda, ServiceNow and Pega BPM, whereas FortressIQ is most compared with UiPath Process Mining and Celonis.
See our list of best Process Mining vendors.
We monitor all Process Mining 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.
