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

Magic xpa Application Platform vs OutSystems 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

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 (8th), Application Infrastructure (14th)
OutSystems
Ranking in Mobile Development Platforms
1st
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
51
Ranking in other categories
Rapid Application Development Software (3rd), Low-Code Development Platforms (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Mobile Development Platforms category, the mindshare of Magic xpa Application Platform is 4.2%, up from 2.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OutSystems is 20.5%, down from 22.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Mobile Development Platforms
 

Featured Reviews

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.
Bireswar Das - PeerSpot reviewer
A low-code platform for the development of mobile and web enterprise applications
To illustrate a case, the customer initially had a private cloud, essentially a data center hosted within it. They needed a disaster recovery solution, which would involve using a public cloud. This situation led to some deployment challenges due to the hybrid nature of their setup. However, once we implemented the solution for them, they were extremely satisfied. The process was not only effective but also quite speedy. To be more precise, we completed it in around 100 days, even though they initially requested it to be done in four months. They were very pleased with the efficiency of the implementation.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Typically an experienced Magic developer can do the work of two to three experienced C#/.NET developers. Customers are amazed at how quickly most new features can be added and bug fixes implemented. I have worked for four employers - including myself - using Magic, and in most instances, bug fixes are addressed and deployed in under six hours."
"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."
"The speed of development is the quickest for any tool on 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 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 solution makes the managing and adapting of the software very easy."
"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."
"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.)."
"Let's assume a project in .NET, native .NET, or Java takes around 12 months. In OutSystems, we can build that application in four to five months."
"The drag-and-drop feature is very valuable."
"One thing I like about OutSystems is that there's no lock-in. You can keep running your applications because it's on .NET and hosted centrally. That's one of the advantages I see there in terms of not having an IT strategy that has a dependency on a particular platform."
"OutSystems' low-cost approach has positively impacted our productivity, because we were able to develop faster with OutSystems, enabling us to implement many changes during our sprint."
"Reduces the manual labor in compiling and deploying applications and generating procedural code (by reducing development bureaucracy/processes, resulting in real gains). The LifeTime Server approach, requiring just a few steps to publish applications in production environments, is fantastic."
"I really like the one-click publish feature in OutSystems. In other development tools/languages, it's not as easy. I also like how easily I can manage all my projects in one place."
"Once built, web/mobile components can be reused in all new developments. In addition, the OutSystems Forge is very useful. We can exchange components and even already-built applications, reducing costs to build specific solutions."
"Scalability proved to be an exceptionally beneficial feature."
 

Cons

"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."
"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."
"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)."
"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 ability to display page up, page down, top and bottom buttons along the scroll bar would make my mouse-reliant customers happy."
"Support is very bad."
"There is room for improvement in Magic's marketing and licensing. I would like to see more integration of web functionality."
"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."
"I'd like to see AI features integrated into the solution."
"One of the biggest areas for improvement is that every time an existing data element is modified, it creates a new data element. It doesn't really modify that particular data element. So, a user has to follow an extra step of removing the existing data element and bringing in the new and modified data element that is being added, which sort of goes into negative productivity."
"The initial setup is a little difficult."
"I would like to see OutSystems improve its integration capabilities, especially with emerging technologies like AI and GPT."
"The tool's weakness is its focus on the solution only. Other than that, it's pretty easy to use for both technical and non-technical people. However, the tool lags in automation. For instance, we've used Python for scraping and other automated tasks. So, I believe automation is an area where it could improve."
"Since we first started using OutSystems, they switched their language support from Java and .NET to .NET only, which was a bit of a surprise. Their language support could be better in this sense, although on our resource side it is now a bit more flexible."
"I have difficulty in using several new features. Some of the product's features are tricky to use as well."
"I would like to see improvements in versioning. It can be challenging to keep track of what changes should be committed, especially when many developers are working in one environment."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"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."
"The cost for developers is high because you have to pay for licenses as well as runtime."
"The licensing is too costly."
"For one developer to use, the cost is around $5,000."
"The price is okay. OutSystems isn't expensive. It's a mid-range solution."
"It is not an expensive product, especially if you have access to more features and deal with more projects."
"The solution is expensive."
"It's not cheap. It's pretty expensive."
"As for licensing costs, I'm not directly involved in that aspect."
"OutSystems is an expensive product. My company has to make monthly payments towards the licensing costs attached to the solution."
"OutSystems was open to a deal that worked for both sides."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Mobile Development Platforms solutions are best for your needs.
849,686 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Government
9%
Insurance Company
9%
Educational Organization
29%
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
Which solution is better for developing non-ITSM applications: OutSystems or Service Now?
The short answer is that OutSystems is far better for 2 main reasons. Firstly, with Service Now you are locked into that platform for good. The business model is to lock in and then keep pumping th...
What industries do you think OutSystems is most useful for?
I cannot really name an industry in which OutSystems cannot be beneficial. Who does not want to make top-notch applications that work in no time? And OutsyStems does exactly that. The low-code plat...
How did you decide which OutSystems edition was the best one for you?
We started using OutSystems fairly recently, so we are still on the free version of it. My company is still testing how we like the platform, but so far, we have been satisfied with it and will li...
 

Also Known As

uniPaaS
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

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
Randstad, Warner Brothers, HP, Intel, ING, Banco Popular, Thrivent Financial, Bacardi, Kent State University, Bacardi, FICO, ING, Vodafone, AbbVie, Estafeta, Siemens, Vopak
Find out what your peers are saying about Magic xpa Application Platform vs. OutSystems and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
849,686 professionals have used our research since 2012.