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

Magic xpa Application Platform vs Mendix 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)
Mendix
Ranking in Mobile Development Platforms
2nd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
52
Ranking in other categories
Rapid Application Development Software (8th), Low-Code Development Platforms (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Mobile Development Platforms category, the mindshare of Magic xpa Application Platform is 4.0%, up from 2.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Mendix is 22.5%, up from 21.5% 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.
Sameer Verma - PeerSpot reviewer
Low-code, helpful support, and great native mobile capability
There is always a layer of custom code required. There is a misconception of low-code, or Mendix, or the industry in general. They are perceived as more of a dashboarding tool, and as a visualization platform only, rather than building a complete enterprise solution. That's more of an awareness marketing challenge they have, or the industry has. In general, AI needs to be better. The team and the company is running ahead with this a bit more. AI area is something which companies have started to pick up on, low-code wise, and they should invest in it more. I would like to see their data hub module become a little bit more mature. They need to expand their base as the concept is amazing. We just need to see more use cases and learn more capabilities there, and then definitely they need to fill in the AI piece of it.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Speed of development and database connectivity (MS SQL, Oracle, DB2, Btrieve/Pervasive PSQL, ODBC, MySql, and SQLite)."
"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’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."
"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’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.)."
"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."
"The speed of development is the quickest for any tool on the market."
"xpa gives us a fast development speed."
"The most valuable features of the product are its ease of use and speed. My friend and I find it helpful as a team of just two developers."
"You can scale the solution."
"The development environment is model-driven. We can use the information from this for our business engineers to make the information models, and they can also execute the model."
"It's amazing that you can build web apps and mobile (hybrid) apps with one code base in a few clicks. It's a full continuous integration environment."
"The most valuable features are the integration and UI customization."
"Mendix has made a great deal of effort to provide its developers a healthy, modern environment for developing. First of all, it adopts Agile methodology by creating a SCRUM-based app where you can handle your user stories. Next comes version control, which really allows multiple team members to collaborate quite easily. And last but not least, Mendix modeler, which is your IDE for developing Mendix apps."
"The integrated security saves a lot of time, especially when it comes to setting up user-roles and security. Also, database updates work automatically. There is no need to write queries to update the database, once you make an update."
"I find the fast development speed and low cost to be very valuable features of Mendix. It's a smart solution for busy developers when we need to apply new changes or fixes quickly. Mendix helps to save time and meet project deadlines faster."
 

Cons

"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"The ability to display page up, page down, top and bottom buttons along the scroll bar would make my mouse-reliant customers happy."
"I would like to see a spell checker included with optional language support. Currently, this has to be purchased from a third-party."
"One thing I would like to improve is the support system offered by Mendix. It can sometimes take a while to get the help I need when I'm using Mendix."
"Mendix could improve by allowing the customization of different programming languages, such as Python and C++."
"All software applications have their hiccups, including the Mendix Studio Pro developers program."
"Mendix needs to think about itself offering machine learning and artificial intelligence."
"It could use a more comprehensive widget creation studio in the IDE."
"While the community is great, they need to work on making their direct technical support services better."
"It is expensive."
"Mendix is slightly less scalable than I'd like."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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 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."
"The licensing is too costly."
"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 cost for developers is high because you have to pay for licenses as well as runtime."
"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."
"Its cost is higher than competitors. The cost mostly includes licensing. It is charged per user. The cost model could be better. When you have a big company, what does per user mean? If I have a company where I have 40,000 people who will go to access it but only 200 do, how do you license it and who do you pay for? If they hit it once, do you pay for it? The licensing is complex for a big company. It is easy for us to buy all we can eat, get an enterprise license agreement, and call it good."
"The solution is a bit expensive compared to others"
"Mendix licensing cost is based on the number of apps you have on the server. At the basic level, it is free of charge, so that seems reasonable, but once you go beyond that, and when it comes to the number of users on the app, that basic structure doesn't work, and the pricing tends to get a little bit steep."
"I would not recommend the solution to small and medium-sized businesses because it’s expensive. It’s great for big organizations. I rate the pricing as a three out of ten."
"Mendix seems a bit expensive. But in terms of wanting to have less developers and higher velocity, the total cost of ownership is fine. It's not cheap, though."
"Mendix is not open source, but its license cost is cheap, particularly when compared to the Appian license. The license model would depend on how many users you have and how many applications you are creating. If you are creating a single app, you just need to have a single app license, so it's free. If you want a multiple app license to cover two thousand or three thousand users, for example, internal users or external users, then you need to pay for the license. There's also a license model for above three thousand or four thousand, or five thousand internal and external users."
"From a commercial point of view, we would like them to change that they currently sell it as a platform, but as a customer you have to decide upfront the usage of the platform. We would like to have Mendix sell it as a pay as you go model: You pay for what you use, and you don't pay for what you don't use."
"Licensing costs are similar to those for all other IT technology, but they vary by region."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Mobile Development Platforms solutions are best for your needs.
845,040 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Insurance Company
10%
Government
9%
Computer Software Company
17%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
9%
University
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What do you like most about Mendix?
We also use Mendix Enterprise Integration for complex business logic. It's a low-code platform, so we run Mendix in the Mendix Cloud.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Mendix?
I would rate the pricing a six out of ten. The solution is a bit expensive compared to others, but in the long term, it is worth it. For instance, Microsoft Power Apps don't demand a huge investmen...
What needs improvement with Mendix?
All software applications have their hiccups, including the Mendix Studio Pro developers program. Though still improving, there is no specific example of what really needs to be improved. Some lear...
 

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
Genzyme, TNT, Yahoo, Capgemini, Roche, D&B, Aegon, kpn, AZL, Sky, Arch, Penn State Univeristy, BancABC
Find out what your peers are saying about Magic xpa Application Platform vs. Mendix and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
845,040 professionals have used our research since 2012.