No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

IBM MobileFirst vs Magic xpa Application Platform comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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 (5th)
Magic xpa Application Platform
Ranking in Mobile Development Platforms
11th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
Application Server (9th), Application Infrastructure (15th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Mobile Development Platforms category, the mindshare of IBM MobileFirst is 5.0%, up from 3.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Magic xpa Application Platform is 3.9%, up from 3.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Mobile Development Platforms Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Magic xpa Application Platform3.9%
IBM MobileFirst5.0%
Other91.1%
Mobile Development Platforms
 

Featured Reviews

MT
Senior Solutions Architect at a tech services company with 201-500 employees
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
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

"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, and 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"
"One of the most valuable features is that we are using the IBM MobileFirst, which is actually providing a gateway to all the mobile resources either for the employees or for the consumers."
"We use it as a secure proxy server for a mobile app using public internet as well as for its mobile app support features."
"IBM MobileFirst has one of the most feature-rich admin panels."
"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’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.)."
"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."
"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."
"My employees can develop and deploy something in a matter of hours."
"In spite of the solution's high cost, we see a very large return on our investment."
"I think this is a good tool for making some nice applications independent of the operating system, database, and environment."
"xpa gives us a fast development speed."
 

Cons

"I would like to see improved support for native device functions."
"There are issues with push notifications, especially for Windows mobile apps. JSONStore also crashes abruptly at times."
"Debugging .NET snippets is not possible, so it lacks the effects to solve problems. First you have to write and test your .NET code in VS, then you have to copy the .NET code in Magic xpa because there is almost nothing to debug it."
"The company has now released version 4 for web development, but this new release is still pretty hard to use for mobile and web development because it was not improved as much as we expected in the areas of user-friendliness or development-friendliness."
"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)."
"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."
"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."
"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."
 

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."
"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."
"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."
"My clients have to purchase additional licenses in order to use what I built. It's not a fair approach."
"The licensing is too costly."
"The licensing cost varies because nowadays Magic has tailor-made offerings for clients. I think the solution is worth the 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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Mobile Development Platforms solutions are best for your needs.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Manufacturing Company
15%
Comms Service Provider
14%
Outsourcing Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
11%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise1
 

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: September 2026.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.