We performed a comparison between IIS and Magic xpa Application Platform based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Server solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The product is easy to configure."
"The solution integrates well with most Microsoft products."
"It is a lightweight web host that is easy to configure for simple webpages."
"The solution is highly reliable."
"It is an easy-to-use and secure program."
"The solution is simple and very easy to manage compared to Linux."
"It has an intuitive user interface and provides a lot of options for building reports."
"IIS is useful for the deployment of web applications...Its stability is good."
"The speed of development is the quickest for any tool on the market."
"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."
"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 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."
"Speed of development and database connectivity (MS SQL, Oracle, DB2, Btrieve/Pervasive PSQL, ODBC, MySql, and SQLite)."
"The solution makes the managing and adapting of the software very easy."
"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."
"Performance-wise, certain improvements in IIS are needed...IIS is not scalable. Its scalability is less."
"If Microsoft IIS could work well with AppOptics or things like PHP, Python, and other custom languages that run on the webserver, it would be ideal. I think there are cases where people need to use Apache instead of IIS when IIS doesn't work well with other web languages."
"The initial setup could be made easier."
"We'd like future versions to be more stable."
"Compared to Linux, the solution’s Windows patching is slower. I would like to improve it."
"The user interface could be improved."
"Scalability issues and security concerns need attention from Microsoft."
"The documentation of IIS could be better. They are not easily accessible. I had to use YouTube and other online resources to learn how to use the solution properly."
"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 user interface could be improved to be more friendly for developers."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"There is room for improvement in Magic's marketing and licensing. I would like to see more integration of web functionality."
"Throughout my career, I've encountered difficulties when integrating new technologies with Magic xpa Application Platform. In particular, when attempting to incorporate features from other development languages into earlier versions of the solution called uniPaaS. I struggled to integrate .NET components due to the limited options available. This made the process more challenging and complicated. I find it challenging to create a more user-friendly experience for users who may be comparing the system to other systems they have used outside or within the company on different platforms."
More Magic xpa Application Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
IIS is ranked 4th in Application Server with 53 reviews while Magic xpa Application Platform is ranked 7th in Application Server with 10 reviews. IIS is rated 8.0, while Magic xpa Application Platform is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of IIS writes " A simple and easy-to-use solution but not recommended for public apps". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Magic xpa Application Platform writes "Fast development and user-oriented functionalities, but it needs better .NET integration and a completely different pricing structure". IIS is most compared with NGINX Plus, Apache Web Server, Tomcat, Oracle WebLogic Server and JBoss, whereas Magic xpa Application Platform is most compared with Microsoft .NET Framework, Mendix, OutSystems and GeneXus. See our IIS vs. Magic xpa Application Platform report.
See our list of best Application Server vendors and best Application Infrastructure vendors.
We monitor all Application Server 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.
