The main use case is that it is a platform as a service based on .NET. We can build any type of enterprise application, but not reporting tools. It supports multi-channel development for websites and mobile applications. We can create a single mobile application and generate iOS for the App Store and Android APK files for the Google Play Store. No recoding is required for conversion, only generation of iOS or APK files as needed.

I have mainly worked on financial and banking domains, and this platform supports all types of use cases. Additionally, with generative AI, OutSystems has started supporting it.

By using a backend database to store data brainstorming and consuming AWS APIs, our customers support the predictive AI mechanism. We can also go with generative AI because most of the tools are available in the market. OutSystems has a feature, IPP (Intellectual Property Protection), that allows for architectural property.

If someone wants to develop a website or web application in two to three months, they can develop that application in OutSystems. If they don't want to continue with OutSystems as a platform, they can convert the OutSystems source code into normal .NET code.

There is no extra cost required, and the application will work as a .NET source code base.

This is a possibility that the user or company can adapt this tool for development, and later, if they want to save costs, they can convert it to .NET. This is not possible with other tools.

OutSystems has integrated AI. We can improve the application tool. For example, if a user is creating a ticket, by using generative AI technology, we can create user interaction inputs. Users can input case IDs and their contacts. Based on that, the large language model (LLM) connects with the OutSystems vector databases and is capable of analyzing and understanding what you want in natural language.

So, some sort of predictive analysis. Based on that, the program can accept the outputs.

There is room for improvement in support. They maintain a two-day SLA for everything. 48 hours is very high.

Scalability is supported by default by OutSystems on the cloud. Let's say we are buying 10 GB or 20 GB of hardware, and our database is near failure. We can request them to increase the sizes from the backend. The OutSystems cloud platform is based on AWS and installed on AWS. So whatever AWS supports is supported by OutSystems.

If we need any extra features, like using S3, OutSystems can integrate with it, but extra licensing costs are required. From the scalability and security point of view, everything is supported by OutSystems, and it is a managed service. Based on that, they are charging.

If I face any problem during application development, I can create tickets based on the category by logging into my account. There is an SLA of two to three days based on the ticket's priority, and the team responds accordingly.

Most of the time, they resolve all issues. To speed up the process, they call if there is a high-priority ticket. We connect with them and fix the issue collaboratively via phone.

I will not rate it ten, though, because they are maintaining a two-day SLA for everything. 48 hours is very high.

I did not spend my time on any other platform. For the last ten years, I have only been involved with OutSystems.

The initial setup is not difficult because everything is based on integration. A set of databases, like vector databases, and things like that require extra hardware and software configuration. But integrating with OutSystems is very easy.

There is ROI. To be specific, it's purely for the developers. It's reducing the cost of development. There is a 100% guarantee the platform is promoting code on the server with accuracy. Logical errors are a different thing, but the source code generated is secure. Anyone can understand the source code easily. We are providing security as a visual development tool.

By using the visual development tool, there is no need to remember the syntax. Everything is available as drag and drop. It just depends on remembering how and when we need to use a node for development purposes. 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.

So, twice or even more. This is the area where we can improve and save money. But definitely, this is a highly in-demand tool, and the cost is very high. It's completely dependent on the vendor. Some companies are going with the cloud environment, and some organizations are using the on-premises environment. In the cloud environment, everything is managed by OutSystems. They provide some credentials, and the company can start developing multiple applications on the same cloud license.

The cost is high. I saw on the website that the minimum license is around $4,000 per month.

Overall, I would rate it a ten out of ten. I would definitely recommend this tool.

Wherever there's a mobile platform in use, there tends to be a fair amount of application activity as well. In these situations, we've observed that it's straightforward for us to integrate our systems, and this process is also highly consultative.

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.

I'm genuinely content with the fact that all my goals and objectives have been successfully achieved in everything we've undertaken. As I mentioned previously, we found this especially valuable in terms of engagement for mobile apps. Surprisingly, we didn't encounter any notable challenges or areas where implementation was problematic. As a sales professional, I also received minimal customer feedback regarding any issues during meetings, which led me to believe that everything was going smoothly from a technical perspective. However, the initial setup can be made a little easier.

I have been using OutSystems for the past four years.

It is stable.

Scalability proved to be an exceptionally beneficial feature. In one instance, we needed to transition from a single-tenant setup to a multi-tenant one, and we accomplished this seamlessly. The customers were also delighted with the outcome, as we successfully executed the shift from a single-tenant to a multi-tenant configuration.

I would rate it a nine out of ten.

It was outstanding.

All options are equally commendable, but our system is notably budget-friendly. As a result, many customers are now making the switch to our platform. There are three key reasons behind this shift: our user-friendly interface, the stability of our solution, and its competitive pricing.

The initial setup is a little difficult.

Some of my clients come from government backgrounds, so they prefer on-premises deployment for their systems. However, in cases where there's no sensitive data involved, they are open to using cloud-based solutions. It's worth noting that the cloud adoption trend is still in progress, and we're gradually transitioning from on-premises to cloud-based systems. Looking ahead, I believe that in the next three to five years, cloud providers like AWS and other hyper-scale cloud platforms will play a significant role. They offer tremendous scalability and various features that make them highly valuable compared to other solutions. The deployment process takes almost ten to nine weeks for smaller applications to approximately not more than three months. Our current situation involves a mix of both on-premises and cloud deployments.

I would rate it five to six out of ten.

Two of my clients have implemented SpamTitan in their marketing and sales departments. They operate through a distribution channel, and this is where they utilize SpamTitan. They are exceptionally pleased with the results. Essentially, they deal with the delivery of products like milk, where customers place orders, and the products are delivered to their doorstep the next morning. Customers can easily place orders through their website, which is highly user-friendly. Interestingly, approximately eighty percent of transactions are now conducted through mobile devices, underscoring the system's convenience and efficiency.

I would rate the solution a 10 out of 10.

We use OutSystems for the same purpose as Mendix, but we recommend Mendix for mobile applications and OutSystems for B2C or B2B web portals. OutSystems has strong features for creating web-based portals or eCommerce marketplaces.

Mendix supports Java, while OutSystems supports .NET. We are using the latest versions of OutSystems. We are partnered with Mendix and OutSystems. We have access to their partner portal, so we don't need to worry about developing applications, proofs of concept, or prototypes using OutSystems.

OutSystems has on-premise and cloud versions. It can be deployed on AWS, Azure, or GCP. OutSystems is available as a Platform-as-a-Service, as well. OutSystems can be hosted on Azure, GCP, or AWS, and you can deploy OutSystems components on OutSystems PaaS.

The architecture of OutSystems is quite simple, and the features are similar to Mendix's. OutSystems has connectors for different enterprise apps and solid reporting capabilities. You can also integrate with any content management platform like SharePoint or Adobe Enterprise Manager, or something like that. You can also create and integrate workflows.

We'd like OutSystems to add stronger workflow-based automation similar to what Appian offers. It needs more workflow modeling and RPA features.

I have been using OutSystems for the last three years.

Like Mendix, OutSystems has a highly scalable and flexible architecture.

We are an OutSystems partner, so I have an excellent rapport with alliance managers and their technical architecture team and technical support. They're incredibly supportive. I rate OutSystems eight out of 10.

We are using almost all the local solutions, including OutSystems, Mendix, Appian, etc.

Setting up OutSystems is straightforward.

OutSystems isn't expensive. It's very similar to the cost of Mendix. If customers have a good relationship with OutSystems or Mendix, they can get a better price. The solutions have a similar pricing model, including licenses for single or multiple users.

I rate OutSystems nine out of 10. OutSystems is the market leader in the local area space on the Gartner Magic Quadrant. As a user, I can say OutSystems is on par with Mendix, and the features are similar, so now it depends on the use case.

For example, some customers prefer Mendix because they have SAP ecosystems, so they will go with Mendix because it offers native SAP support. Mendix has SAP adapters that are all license-free. These are cost reasons people might choose Mendix. However, there are some cases where an SAP might go for OutSystems because the license is a bit cheaper.