Mendix Reviews

I am currently evaluating the product.

I enjoy the low-code nature of the product.

It's user-friendly and very easy to handle.

The product was easy to set up.

It is stable.

The stability is good.

I'm still in the evaluation phase. I have not fully vetted the entire product yet.

It is expensive.

I've been evaluating the solution for three months. Before I evaluated Mendix, I evaluated OutSystems for six months.

The stability has been good. There are no bugs or glitches and it doesn't crash or freeze. it's reliable. 

The product can scale and expand if you need it to.

We're planning to use it for 100 people.

At the moment, I can't communicate with technical support. It's expensive. I've never dealt with them directly.

I have using the OutSystems and now use Mendix.

It's an easy, straightforward setup. It's not overly complex or difficult at all. Setting it up shouldn't be an issue. 

The solution has been very expensive overall. It was not cheap.

At the moment, I'm looking for a solution for low code, so I am evaluating any product or solution with low code as an option. We already tried OutSystems. Microsoft Power Apps is another solution that may be an option.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. I can recommend it as a scalable option. It is easy to use and the evaluation is not expensive. The support is for the moment is good but expensive. 

I'm just a partner and an end-user.

I'm using the solution for assignments with my students. I give little projects to my students and I want them to use the free version of Mendix to solve the problem.

Usually, my class is around 30 students and we separate into ten groups. Each is comproised of three students and we give each group the task of building some small application using a local platform. 

There is a free version of the solution you can use. 

Mostly, the students are very excited about the product due to the fact that they can make applications without coding.

Students do have some difficulties translating the hard code. They are usually using code from a previous course.

My understanding is that, if you are not using the free version, it is very expensive. 

We'd like more support and more publication of use cases and examples so that students can more easily study the product and better understand how it works and its applications. 

I've used the solution for two or three years. 

The solution has been stable. We haven't had issues with it having bugs or glitches and it doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable and the performance is good. 

The free version has some restricted functions. It doesn't give you access to the full solution. 

The only technical support is from the documentation and website, no more. If a customer has difficulty figuring out how to use it, they can start with the documentation and learn how to use it, how to set it up, et cetera. They can learn to build an application with restricted functionality from the free version and go from there. 

We use usually two platforms - Mendix and OutSystems. So we freely let the students make the choice as to whether they use Mendix or OutSystems and usually 50% use OutSystems and 50% use Mendix.

We take advantage of the free version of the product. 

Once you move away from the free version, it can get pricey.

We're just end-users. 

My students use it. I just view and am not involved intensively in using Mendix.

Coming from a developing country, Indonesia, we hope that Mendix continues to offer a free solution.

It's a very good solution. I'd rate it eight out of ten.

We are building our custom solutions based on Mendix for our clients. Most cases are e-services for the government sector.

It is really a rapid platform where you can minimize the time-to-market, where you can also engage the customer from business perspectives throughout the entire cycle of the development. It is providing really the acceleration to adopt an agility approach.

You can really minimize the time-to-market, which is great.

It is easy to set up.

You can scale the solution.

It's stable. 

The cost of total ownership needs to be better. The licenses are very expensive. If you compare it with, let's say, a kind of BPM, or CRM solutions, the cost is very, very big. 

While the community is great, they need to work on making their direct technical support services better.

I've used the solution for a while.

The product is stable and reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. 

The scalability potential is very good. If you want to expand it, you can. 

There is a weakness in the support. That said, the community is good. You can post your question. You can get support from the community and the answers are quite effective.

They have an amazing academy. They have amazing content for self-learning. Maybe due to that, they don't have that much direct support. They instead seemed to have built a very amazing knowledge base where you can really develop your skills without any direct support and help. Most of our engineers could make the full cycle of e-learning without any class-based training. They also could acquire the certifications without any support. So, even without direct technical support on offer, they have a good online academy.

It's a pretty straightforward setup. It's not overly complex or difficult. It's easy. One DevOps engineer can handle all this stuff for many solutions for many clients. It doesn't require that many resources.

We're a Mendix partner. We have maybe 20 engineers. Most of them are certified. We have Rapid certification and intermediate and advanced certificates. 

We are not a user. We're not a consumer. We are the provider building custom solutions based on Mendix for different clients and different customers in different domains.

I'd advise potential users that the principle of having a citizen developer and a business developer is a good idea. You can engage with the business people from day one with the entire cycle of development. This is maybe the key to having such a platform.

Overall, I would rate the solution eight out of ten.

We use this solution for e-services and for some of the critical applications like enterprise applications for safety department permit applications.

It is a development platform which assists in accelerating your developmental lifecycle. This is one of its most valuable features. This solution also offers a good set of components that are readily available. 

A constraint of Mendix is that you have to look for the required plugins which takes up development time. There are a limited number of Mendix experts in the market. 

We have been using this solution for one year. 

This is a stable solution.

We use Kubernetes environment and the scalability of Mendix depends on this environment. 

The customer support for this solution is good. 

The initial setup was fairly straightforward. The time it takes to complete the setup depends on an organization's internal requirements. The maintenance of Mendix is also straightforward butI would recommend using experienced resources to know Mendix. 

This solution was implemented by an external consultant. 

Our team compared OutSystems with Mendix and confirmed that Mendix was the best solution for our business. 

My recommendation would be if you are looking for a small e-services kind of applications and you need quick delivery, I would recommend Mendix or OutSystems rapid applications. If you have a complex business, I would recommend other programming platforms including Java, GT or .NET.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten. 

We use the solution for small applications - not for an extensive system. We use it more as if we had a quick prototype needed or some small application for one department. If one department needs some application or customization of an application, then we use Mendix, so it's more for small things than big things.

The one feature that I like best yet, which also makes it complicated, is the microservices. They are really what sets Mendix apart from other platforms.

Since my company also works with Menditect, which makes a test automation tool for Mendix, we are quite involved. My coworkers also leverage Mendix. We really like that it's usable for test automation since not all platforms can due to no unique IDs and things like that. With Mendix, we can use the platform very easily for test automation.

The initial setup is easy.

Mendix needs to think about itself offering machine learning and artificial intelligence. That's going to be the future.

I really like that they're already working on new features. Nevertheless, to really be on top of things, they will need to do more in artificial intelligence and machine learning.

I’ve used Mendix for a short period of time - maybe half a year. OutSystems I’ve used a little bit longer.

It’s definitely stable for small applications. With bigger applications, you really need to look into servers and make sure that you also have that setup right. Mendix can also help you with that, so they have a community that can help you set up the right things.

The solution can scale.

Of course, you need to do things for that yourself. It's not that Mendix has it in its platform. It gives you options to help you with your scalability. However, you need to do quite a lot for yourself as well.

I'm working for a test company and we work with quite a few clients. We have seven clients that use Mendix.

For us, technical support was very good. Sometimes I hear that people have other experiences. however, for us, our experience was excellent. When we called or when we had a question, they helped.

The community is very good as well. If you go to their website, you will see that they have a community that can help answer questions. If you ask a question there, people will answer and help you. The support in that is great.

At the moment, I am using OutSytems.

For small applications, it definitely is easy to set up. From my coworkers, I understand if you want bigger applications, it's harder to adapt. However, that's what we see with all the local platforms.

I also worked on another platform where deployment could easily take hours. Yet, with Mendix, it was minutes. That was really good. It’s so fast.

We did the deployment ourselves. We handled the development, testing, acceptance, and the full lifecycle in-house, and we did the deployment ourselves. That was agreeable to everyone.

I wouldn't know about the exact pricing as we are so-called “hired help” and we have no influence on licenses. We also do not have a license of our own. We use our client’s license if they use Mendix. Therefore, I can’t speak to the costs involved in having it.

I am just the software tester. So, I test the quality of applications built in Mendix. So, I do not sell. I am just a very enthusiastic user.

I’m not sure which version I am using and if it is the latest or not.

I would recommend potential new users start with an assessment on what they really need the application to do and then see if Mendix can really help and if it's applicable for their application. Mendix can be used for many things. However, there are a few best uses and also some that are not so compatible with Mendix. A new company must first make sure before they start to understand if Mendix fits the needs.

I’d rate the solution eight out of ten.

We have very broad use cases for Mendix. We use it for internal applications and writing customer applications. We create advanced omnichannel telephony and CRM apps and even have Mendix apps that will be considered big-data apps, like our IoT solution in Agriculture. 

We use Mendix to solve classical business problems, Risk solutions in fintech, Call Center apps, data processing, and used it to solve product development challenges that work well with rapid application processing for new product development. We do both new product development and also full largescale production systems on Mendix. We have solutions deployed on the cloud and on-premises.

We respond much quicker to challenges, our clients are more profitable and our staff love the opportunity to model and not write boring repetitive code.

One of the most valuable features in Mendix is its declarative model-driven development capabilities. Declarative development is important for the future of business software development; it allows us to rapidly model solutions without having to tell the computer how to do the basics. It allows us to focus on rich business logic rather than spending time managing boring technical details as is required with classical imperative development.  

Mendix helps reduce the total cost of ownership: It validates workflows and system flows and this saves significant time when developing and maintaining apps. Refactoring is much easier in Mendix and done with more confidence. 

Mendix apps are relatively quick to develop because it is a low-code platform. It's very robust, flexible, open, and scalable. It's for a low-code savvy customer. The tooling is also really good and it has good mobile app development capabilities with a platform suited to integration and publishing app services. 

So in a nutshell, valuable features: Mendix declarative modelling, finely-grained security model, easy data modelling, easy app integration, tooling, validation, mobile development features, ease of debugging, extensibility and attention to detail of the Mendix core team. 

We would like to see is the ability to version manage modules and not just the app. We need finer-grained version management for software repositories. Version management is good but it needs more work.

Also, because of the licensing model, Mendix apps are too monolithic. It would be great to have a microservices licensing model that works well for microservices especially designed to work with Kafka, Google Pub/Sub and streaming technologies. 

We need much better code refactoring tools, like IntelliJ but for Mendix. For example, if I wanted to maintain all projects and refactor Domain model fields in bulk, it would be good to have intelligent renaming across the whole model with regular expression syntax. The modeller is too clickety-click.

The most important feature I'd like to see is support for is first-rate JSON Schema support and first-rate GraphQL support. Of course, the Modeller must run on Mac, not Windows. 

Lastly, the licensing model does not scale well with many users. This is a huge problem as apps that have many users become very expensive and can kill the business case. Mendix is reasonably negotiable but it's a pain to deal with the licensing for each new project.

I have been working with Mendix for 10+ years.

The stability is very good. This is low hassle, low maintenance technology. We write systems for clients on Mendix and the few support issues we've gotten have been quick to fix. The performance is excellent. 

This product is scalable and it's relatively easy to scale. Because of its architecture, it can't scale like microservices that are designed for scaling across the globe, but Mendix has some horizontal and vertical scaling built in. It's not on the same level that you would get with a native cloud first node app. It's a little bit more limited, but there are still scaling options. 

I would say they're good, but I've never encountered a software vendor with excellent support. 

We tried others and settled on Mendix.

The initial setup was simple. It's not difficult to do yourself. 

We implemented through an in-house team. There are six people in my company working with Mendix. 

High, we do more with highly skilled engineers and love the speed of app development, especially the lower cost of maintaining apps over longer periods.

Mendix seems expensive. But with Mendix, one needs fewer developers to achieve high velocity, and if your environment can achieve that, then the total cost of ownership is fine. It's not cheap, though and not all projects will benefit unless one has a bulk licensing agreement. 

This product is licensed per application, per user. Mendix has other features you can access with a separate license, like Data Hub, but the base license has more than most people need. 

Mendix needs much better React component/widget writing compatibility. it is still more difficult than it should be to add your own components.

Lastly, Low Code Tools are weak at developing multi-tenant apps. One quickly loses the speed advantage and running many apps gets too expensive and a maintenance hassle as these apps tend to be monolithic, partly due to licensing.

Yes, Outsystems but we much preferred Mendix's non-code generating style.  Model Driven Development needs to run a model. We also did not like the licensing model of Outsystems.

I rate this product a nine out of ten. If you consider adopting Mendix, rather build a new culture and a new team. Do not just try and use legacy software developers who are passionate about older technologies. Use Mendix adoption as an opportunity to integrate business and IT; build new teams that are supported by first-rate software engineers AND new business engineers who can focus on understanding both business and IT. This allows one to model the business, understand the business, and develop the right software. 

Mendix is excellent for innovation. Whenever one has an opportunity for new product development, it's an excellent choice.

We have a loan origination platform. What we're looking to do is have a dynamic process whereby, based on a variety of inputs, we can tailor the journey. At the moment, we're debating how that kind of journey works and if we put some kind of workflow in place, then firstly, this becomes a living documentation and, secondly, it's quite easy to be flexible as to how to adapt each journey rather than correcting one great big process. We wanted to break it up into smaller journeys. If each stage is isolated it becomes easier for each change that you want to make. That was the logic.

The features that I have found most valuable with Mendix are its business process management and its minimal low code, both from an interface perspective and from a process perspective. With Camunda, we were looking at it from our business process standpoint. Appian and Mendix were one size fits all.

In terms of what could be improved, of course I'd like it to be highly secure and highly scalable. Security is paramount to us. Scalability-wise, we don't necessarily have a huge volume.

From a scalability perspective, at this particular stage, it's not necessarily a top priority.

We started this journey with Mendix just a couple of months ago.

It is a flexible and stable solution.

Mendix is slightly less scalable than I'd like.

We have 30 internal users. The issue for us is, from a low-code interface perspective, how do we deal with external users?

The installation is fairly simple.

On a scale of one to ten, I would give Mendix about an eight. I'd probably put Appian about the same and Camunda I would say is maybe a six. 

I would recommend Mendix, but obviously, for the right use case. That's the point.

We do not use the solution, but manage Mendix's process. We are partnered with Mendix and implement it within the organization, something practiced with prevalence in the UAE. Those making use of the solution are happy with it. 

The Ministry of Digital Economy in Jordan, which is responsible for managing the service portfolio of the Jordanian government, is wholly based on our Mendix application.

I can tell you how Mendix has improved my organization by discussing the projects with which I am already working. The old service portfolio is based on a Mendix workflow and system.

The most valuable features are the integration and UI customization.

While it is difficult for me to address which areas of the solution are in need of improvement, as I manage Mendix projects, but do not utilize them, I would point out the transformation of the BPM and the process with other applications. This is because the applications are conceptually what we need, as they concern the RPA Automation Anywhere and UiPath.

Mendix has the potential to redesign its process engine for compatibility with a BPMN tool without any further action being required, enabling seamless integration between the business processes design applications.

As mentioned, there needs to be an increase in the number of the UI components so that other platforms will not be used in place of the UI interface of Mendix, such as Angular.

Improvements should be made to the functionality to increase the number of UI components in the actual software. As such, we occasionally go outside the system to develop certain pages in React, Angular or Vue JS, which we then import to Mendix. This we do because of the limitation in the UI design, but it is not on par with what's happening, for example, with OutSystems or other tools.

The solution is stable. The most important entities utilize it, such as the Dubai Municipality in the United Arab Emirates and the Ministry of Digital Economy in Jordan. This has more than 5,000 services deployed in the system, around 2,000 of which utilize Mendix and OutSystems. We have had no complaints about stability, only of ordinary issues involving use of the system that entail errors or call for troubleshooting. 

The Dubai Municipality makes use of Mendix, as well as five out of 40 ministries. They have transferred their core applications to Mendix in their entirety. The remainder are in a transitional phase and this should be completed throughout the entire government of Jordan within five to six years. 

The maintenance contract between the entity and Mendix provides for multiple levels of support, similar to the circumstances existing with ARIS. As mentioned, I rate Mendix as an eight out of ten, because there occasionally occur delays in its adherence to the SLA. However, the solution's tech support tries to be helpful and responsive and to do so in a comparable manner. 

Installing the solution took from five to 10 days to ensure proper integration with, say, the active directory and other tools for data migration.

We handled the deployment.

Licensing costs are similar to those for all other IT technology, but they vary by region. As such, the United States, the UAE, Saudi Arabia and Jordan all have disparate licensing costs, even when it comes to the partners involved. We, for example, are entitled to a 50 to 60 percent  discount on licensing costs, whereas Jordan may be entitled to one of 90 percent. This makes it challenging to properly appraise the cost. ARIS is similar. The average price varies according to region, Jordan being entitled to a 50 percent discount over that of the UAE.

Mendix's support is far superior to that of OutSystems and more competitively priced.

While I can't say exactly which version of Mendix we are using, I can state that it is the latest one. 

The business analyst has a more important role than that of the developer in a Mendix project. He needs a proper understanding of how to design the Mendix process so it may be automatable and executable. The business analyst must be able to use a Mendix platform.

As Mendix needs to improve its product and support, I rate it as an eight out of ten.