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

Ionic 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

Ionic
Ranking in Mobile Development Platforms
6th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Magic xpa Application Platform
Ranking in Mobile Development Platforms
12th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
Application Server (9th), Application Infrastructure (16th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Mobile Development Platforms category, the mindshare of Ionic is 5.5%, down from 7.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Magic xpa Application Platform is 3.5%, up from 3.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Mobile Development Platforms Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Ionic5.5%
Magic xpa Application Platform3.5%
Other91.0%
Mobile Development Platforms
 

Featured Reviews

Roche De Kock - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Developer at a consultancy with 11-50 employees
Allows us to create cross-platform mobile apps from a single code base, but should have a complete set of libraries for Capacitor
When they jumped from version 3 to version 4, 5, and 6, they introduced something called Capacitor, which is basically the tool that you use to convert your code to Xcode, etc. They have a few plugins that are still using, for instance, PhoneGap. So, you have to jump between Capacitor and PhoneGap. Their documentation is good, but there are some versioning control issues. For example, if you want to bring up a phone dial-up or a map, you have to decide whether to use Capacitor, PhoneGap, or Cordova. They started writing Capacitor to get rid of PhoneGap and Cordova, but they haven't yet got all the libraries and all the functionalities. They want you to start using Capacitor, but they don't have all the libraries there. They're developing them as they go. So, currently, you have to mix and match the three. When it comes to mobile applications, I would only like to use Capacitor. I don't want to jump between Cordova and Capacitor or have both of them. That's the main thing for me, but they have been working on it. They have started to bring them closer and closer so that you don't have to use two different sets of libraries. They're close to where you don't have to use Cordova or PhoneGap, and you can only use Capacitor. In versions 5 and 6, they have improved it a lot. They can also improve it in terms of publishing to different stores. For instance, I'm using Firebase to make my Ionic app web compatible. If I don't have a Node.js server to host on, I have to host it on Firebase or something like that. Currently, if I need to publish to different stores, such as the Microsoft store or the Huawei store, the only way I can publish to, for instance, the Huawei store is by creating the APK and uploading it. If they can start adding a little bit more integration to publish to different stores, such as the Samsung store, Huawei store, or Microsoft store, it would be good. Currently, there are no problems with iOS and Google Play Store, but for the other stores, you have to do a little bit of a workaround to get things done. Its stability could be better. For me, jumping between versions 3, 4, and 5 was a big problem because it wasn't seamless. Jumping from version 5 to 6 is more seamless. Jumping from version 3 to 5 has been a nightmare because I had to recode quite a lot to be compatible with version 5. I totally skipped version 4 because it was just too quick. Jumping between versions has definitely been a problem for me. If I have to do a lot of plugins and redo a lot of my coding because they're jumping versions, I'm going to look for something else.
Mylsamy T. - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Associate - IT at Himalaya Wellness Company
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 main value of this solution for our business, is that it is a hybrid product that allows us to write code that is compatible with IOS, Android, and web documents."
"What I like the most about Ionic is live reloading, which enables us to develop new features without having to build the application again and re-check the functionality."
"With the Capacitor feature, you have access to the native attributes of your phone such as your camera. This makes work a lot easier."
"The most valuable feature is the one code deployed to all solutions, which means you do not need to have multiple teams."
"I like that I can place the code and escalate data storage. I also like that it's user-friendly. Nothing is complex in Ionic."
"The most valuable feature of Ionic is the ease of use and the simple connection of the applications. Additionally, the documentation is good in the Ionic application, and beginners can easily learn and download their own application using Ionic. Everyone can easily switch out, their domain, from native applications to hybrid applications."
"Being able to have one set of code is valuable. I don't have to recode for different platforms. I don't have to recode for Xcode, Angular, or Android. So, the biggest feature for me is that it's a hybrid system, and I can have one set of code, and then the tool sets that are in there convert my code for Xcode or Play Store. It makes work a lot easier."
"Ionic's best feature is that it's not necessary to write your own custom codes as all the hybrid is provided by Angular."
"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.)."
"The solution makes the managing and adapting of the software very easy."
"Speed of development and database connectivity (MS SQL, Oracle, DB2, Btrieve/Pervasive PSQL, ODBC, MySql, and SQLite)."
"The speed of development is the quickest for any tool on the market."
"xpa gives us a fast development speed."
"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."
"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."
"Magic’s Database Gateway allows the logic of the program to be isolated from the underlying database. This provides the flexibility not only to move existing programs to different database environments without the need to change the logic in the program but also allows the programmer access to different databases without the need to know how to "talk" to them."
 

Cons

"Ionic could improve in the Native mode because while we do testing it is difficult to find the root cause of problems. It could be more user-friendly."
"In a future release, we would like to have a little more support for the desktop environment. Currently it is still focused on mobile devices."
"The documentation could be improved."
"Ionic's UI component doesn't always look like the native mobile app."
"There could be better support for augmented reality and other things. Geolocation and background app activity are some of the things that are a little more clumsy at the moment and could be improved."
"Ionic is a cross-platform framework, so when we compare Ionic with native Android and iOS, we can see the drawbacks. For example, if you need to work on very high-level aspects of an application such as animation, even if everything else is not putting load on the app, you will still see high load from the server side."
"Ionic would be improved with dynamic design features."
"The navigation within this solution could be improved; it is currently quite complicated to move through the different tabs."
"The user interface could be improved to be more friendly for developers."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"There is room for improvement in Magic's marketing and licensing. I would like to see more integration of web functionality."
"The ability to display page up, page down, top and bottom buttons along the scroll bar would make my mouse-reliant customers happy."
"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)."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Ionic is an open source solution, and there are no hidden fees."
"The solution's open source option is free with no licensing fees."
"I think most of the plugins for Ionic are open source, and you can do a lot with many of the basic features. However, if you need to use a premium plugin for something like extra scroll list functionality, Ionic will ask for a certain sum of money."
"You don't have to pay anything except for certain projects. For example, Appflow has some costs related to it but you don't have to use it. You can also pay for extra support."
"We pay 50,000 dinars per month."
"You can use the free version, but if you still want to buy it, the price starts from $499/month."
"Ionic is an open-source solution, it is free."
"The starting cost for the enterprise option is around one hundred dollars per month."
"The licensing is too costly."
"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."
"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."
"My clients have to purchase additional licenses in order to use what I built. It's not a fair approach."
"The cost for developers is high because you have to pay for licenses as well as runtime."
"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."
"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 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 Mobile Development Platforms solutions are best for your needs.
879,422 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
18%
Computer Software Company
12%
Comms Service Provider
12%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Government
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise6
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise1
 

Also Known As

No data available
uniPaaS
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

MRA, Napa Group, Sworkit, Airbus, Sense Corp, Interactive Gaming Company, Pacifica, Untapp'd, Diesel, National Museum of African American History and Culture
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 Ionic vs. Magic xpa Application Platform and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
879,422 professionals have used our research since 2012.