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

Microsoft Power Apps vs Thinkwise comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 25, 2026

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

Microsoft Power Apps
Ranking in Rapid Application Development Software
1st
Ranking in Low-Code Development Platforms
1st
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
95
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Thinkwise
Ranking in Rapid Application Development Software
37th
Ranking in Low-Code Development Platforms
27th
Average Rating
6.0
Reviews Sentiment
4.3
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Rapid Application Development Software category, the mindshare of Microsoft Power Apps is 7.6%, down from 11.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Thinkwise is 1.0%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Rapid Application Development Software Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Microsoft Power Apps7.6%
Thinkwise1.0%
Other91.4%
Rapid Application Development Software
 

Featured Reviews

BS
Automation Enthusiast at Self employed
Low-code AI workflows have streamlined content curation and currently support rapid app creation
Microsoft Power Apps could be improved because there are still a lot of jargons and too many moving parts. For example, if you look at Copilot, the term Copilot is confusing in the sense of whether it is Copilot in M365, Copilot Studio, or Copilot in Microsoft Power Apps. There is a plan designer which uses Copilot. The whole thing how AI has been positioned is still not lucid for the end user. An end user wants to know exactly what they want and where they go to get it. I think that could also be because things are evolving so fast. From an end-user perspective, the way it has been positioned, the clarity and the boundaries between the different types of offerings and AI offerings available is confusing as of now. There should be better clarity on that. The biggest issue I have, and I have also spoken to a few of my clients about this, is the licensing model. In traditional software development, almost 95 percent of the time, the development team bears the cost of the licenses. For example, if I develop something, I may have to pay licenses for four or five different software that I use. As a user, if you use my services, you probably pay something to me as a subscription, but you do not have to bother about the licenses. All that is wrapped under the hood. Unfortunately, in Power Platform as such, and even in other low-code things like UiPath, if you use a premium feature such as Dataverse, almost everything ends up using Dataverse or SQL Server or some relational database. If you use that, then as an app builder or app maker you have to have a premium license. The end user too would need to have a premium license. That really makes the adoption prohibitive. It is too expensive. We are talking about something like around just for Microsoft Power Apps alone, approximately twenty dollars per month, which is extremely high. Another point to consider for what else can be improved in Microsoft Power Apps is that one does not know what compute power one is getting when one buys a license. If you look at the licensing model, you will get to know how much of Dataverse storage you will get in terms of log storage, database storage, and file storage. However, you do not get to know how much of compute power is being given to you. I do not think Microsoft has an SLA saying that any request of a certain amount, such as MB per second, you will get a response time of whatever, one by sixtieth of a second or some millisecond. I do not think that they have that performance SLA in place. They do have storage SLA which comes with the license, but they do not have a corresponding SLA for performance.
Marjolein Pordon - PeerSpot reviewer
Software Test Analyst at Squerist
Low-code platform needs knowledge of coding and best practices to make it work best.
This is not a stable solution. When work has been done on screen A, for example, this has lead to a downfall in screen B. This has occurred even when there appears to be connection between the two. This is mostly happening because developers are not using of are not aware of best practices within platforms. It's like Excel. I can make a lot in Excel, but if my calculations are wrong, it's me that is in the fault, not Excel.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"One of the valuable features of PowerApps is the ability to generate QR codes and scan barcodes, as well as take an image."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft PowerApps is the ease of use to create an application."
"If you're looking for a GUI front end to maintain your data, that interfaces with PowerBI, this has to be up there in terms of best options."
"What I find the most valuable is the simplicity to create PowerApps and link them to a list and then bring the list from SharePoint, and sharing the data in SharePoint with other people who do not need to have access to a mobile."
"PowerApps offers more flexibility than Salesforce."
"The most valuable features are low-code and fast development."
"Overall, the tool is very democratic. It's easy for anyone to use. You don't have to be a professional or well-versed in technology."
"In terms of ROI, if you look at the cost of building an app, the coding costs would be much higher without this solution, and you can save months of development time and the money needed to deploy the solution, so in that sense, the ROI is awesome."
"We use this solution as a customer portal for teachers so they can plan exams for their students. Exams will also be created in the portal in future."
 

Cons

"Custom error management is also a challenge. Customization, including the ability to integrate custom code, would be valuable."
"I recommend improving Microsoft Power Apps' licensing model. I've encountered challenges related to licensing complexity, which has led some customers to opt for traditional solution development and deployment methods instead."
"Microsoft PowerApps is not intended for customizing what's generated in a major way."
"You cannot scale with PowerApps. PowerApps is still very much a point solution."
"I would like to have more options for changing the layout because customizing something as simple as colors is very hard."
"In my experience, the solution's deployment can be tricky."
"Microsoft PowerApps can improve the number of bugs that are present. When you are using the different applications it is not accurate."
"They get expensive when you start to go to non-internal users."
"This solution could be more user-friendly and involve less code. It requires a lot of SQL knowledge and programming. It is not a drag and drop solution."
"This solution is difficult to scale. We found it challenging to ensure that many more users could use the system without any trouble."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We would advise organizations that this solution has a high-price point. However, the cost is justified for how comprehensive the package is, and all components of the solution are available under the standard license plan; there are no hidden costs involved."
"The cost for licensing could be lower."
"If you start to use any premium connectors that are not stored in a SharePoint list or on an Excel workbook, then it costs $4 per user per month. If you want unlimited, it's about $16 per month for unlimited apps, and unlimited connectors."
"Microsoft Power Apps is not an expensive solution."
"One of the main things about this solution is the price. The cost for Salesforce is $35, $25, or $10 per user per month. PowerApps costs much less than that. It is at a good price point. It may change in the future, but at this point, its price is pretty fine."
"The company has a subscription where you can use certain features for free, but there are features that require a premium subscription to use."
"It might be too complicated to continuously monitor the business consumption and what to pay."
"The platform's pricing is reasonable."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Rapid Application Development Software solutions are best for your needs.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Government
8%
Outsourcing Company
7%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business32
Midsize Enterprise16
Large Enterprise50
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

How would you choose between Microsoft PowerApps and Salesforce Platform?
I think it depends on your use case. If your organization uses Microsoft Enterprise products, PowerApps will work better in your environment. Similarly, if you have a Salesforce integration in pla...
Would you choose ServiceNow over Microsoft PowerApps?
Hi Netanya, I will choose ServiceNow because ServiceNow is a very good tool compared to Microsoft PowerApp. Because ServiceNow has a very strong module (Performance Analysis) reporting which will ...
Would you choose Microsoft Azure App Service or PowerApps?
Microsoft Azure App Service is helpful if you need to set up temporary servers for customers to run their programs in locations that other cloud providers do not cater to. When servers are closer t...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

PowerApps, MS PowerApps
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

TransAlta, Rackspace, Telstra
VDL Group, Antea Group, Acto, Manter International, W.E.C. Lines
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Oracle, Unqork and others in Rapid Application Development Software. Updated: October 2026.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.