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

IBM MobileFirst vs Magic xpa Application Platform comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 4, 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

IBM MobileFirst
Ranking in Mobile Development Platforms
13th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Mobile App Platforms (8th)
Magic xpa Application Platform
Ranking in Mobile Development Platforms
9th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
Application Server (9th), Application Infrastructure (14th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Mobile Development Platforms category, the mindshare of IBM MobileFirst is 2.2%, up from 1.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Magic xpa Application Platform is 4.1%, up from 2.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Mobile Development Platforms
 

Featured Reviews

MT
Streamlines development of hybrid applications, and has ability to integrate device-native code
It was a cakewalk for us to develop mobile apps for three different platforms using IBM MobileFirst. Since it was a consumer application built for large-scale events, it was very crucial for us to manage application compatibility with all sort of devices. With MobielFirst, we could actually achieve this with very little trouble. With help of this product, we have been able to develop mobile applications without having complete knowledge of each mobile OS's native programming. App development, delivery, and code management have been very efficient using this product.
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

"With help of this product, we have been able to develop mobile applications without having complete knowledge of each mobile OS's native programming technology. App development, delivery, and code management have been very efficient using this product."
"I like Its capability for developing hybrid applications, with an ability to integrate device-native code as well"
"IBM MobileFirst has one of the most feature-rich admin panels."
"Speed of development and database connectivity (MS SQL, Oracle, DB2, Btrieve/Pervasive PSQL, ODBC, MySql, and SQLite)."
"Without the need to compile code, the time spent in the development cycle is greatly reduced, allowing the programmer to test modifications to a program immediately after they have been saved."
"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 speed of development is the quickest for any tool on the market."
"The solution makes the managing and adapting of the software very easy."
"The ability to use the same development environment for both Windows and Android applications. Magic xpa also supports iOS applications."
"What I found most valuable in the Magic xpa Application Platform is that it has a client-server and web browser technology that's perfect for company users."
"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

"There are issues with push notifications, especially for Windows mobile apps. JSONStore also crashes abruptly at times."
"I would like to see improved support for native device functions."
"I would like to see a spell checker included with optional language support. Currently, this has to be purchased from a third-party."
"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."
"It is missing basic charting tools for bar/pie/series charts. It is left to the developer to acquire and deploy charting tools or the customer to purchase a third-party reporting tool to produce charts."
"The user interface could be improved to be more friendly for developers."
"There is room for improvement in Magic's marketing and licensing. I would like to see more integration of web functionality."
"Magic has a tradition, when it adds new technologies/features to the Magic development tool, to provide either no documentation or documentation that does not provide an organized approach for bringing this new technology/feature to experienced Magic programmers."
"The ability to display page up, page down, top and bottom buttons along the scroll bar would make my mouse-reliant customers happy."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Cost depends upon various factors. Size of the overall application and product usage matter a lot. For an enterprise-grade application, this certainly comes out as an economical solution. However, for small-scale applications, it can turn out to be on the higher side."
"The licensing cost varies because nowadays Magic has tailor-made offerings for clients. I think the solution is worth the money."
"The cost for developers is high because you have to pay for licenses as well as runtime."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"My clients have to purchase additional licenses in order to use what I built. It's not a fair approach."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Mobile Development Platforms solutions are best for your needs.
860,168 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
20%
Computer Software Company
18%
Non Profit
10%
Real Estate/Law Firm
8%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
11%
Government
9%
Insurance Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Also Known As

MobileFirst, Worklight
uniPaaS
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

UniCredit Business Integrated Solutions, Gruppo Unipol, Raymond James Financial, Toshiba GCS, CST, ABK-Systeme GmbH, BNP Paribas
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 IBM MobileFirst vs. Magic xpa Application Platform and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
860,168 professionals have used our research since 2012.