|
| 1 | +# Windmill compared to its peers |
| 2 | + |
| 3 | +We are aware other framework exist out there. Some of them might suit your specific needs. We believe Windmill is **the only solution to provide this comprehensive set of feature and to be fully open-source** at the same time. |
| 4 | + |
| 5 | +Out of transparency, here is our (subjective) impression on other players you might come across. |
| 6 | + |
| 7 | +## No-code solutions |
| 8 | + |
| 9 | +Those names are well-known to the general public and contributied to grow awareness in the workflow building space. |
| 10 | +They are made for **operational teams**, have pretty UIs but are limited in terms of use cases, power & flexibility. |
| 11 | +We do not compare ourselves to them. |
| 12 | + |
| 13 | +examples: _Zapier_ or _Make_ |
| 14 | + |
| 15 | +## Code-based workflow engines |
| 16 | + |
| 17 | +On the opposite side, you could chose to go on code-based solutions. They give a solid foundation for building your workflows and clean up your code. |
| 18 | +However, these solutions are less intuitive as they are **complex to set up and operate**. Also, they do not allow to share scripts easily or build UIs. |
| 19 | + |
| 20 | +Although these approaches are interesting, **these players do not seek to reduce the same problems as Windmill**. |
| 21 | + |
| 22 | +examples: _Temporal_ & _Airflow_ |
| 23 | + |
| 24 | +## Admin panels builders |
| 25 | + |
| 26 | +Getting closer to Windmill. Those players have a blent on admin panels. Therefore their are strong on UIs and now-code features. |
| 27 | +They allow you to use code in the process. However we believe **they lack flexibility for building complex workflows**. |
| 28 | + |
| 29 | +examples: _Retool_, _n8n_ and their open source alternatives _Tooljet_ & _Appsmith_ |
| 30 | + |
| 31 | +## Most comparable players |
| 32 | + |
| 33 | +Those ones have comparable set of features, they have the **flexibility of code** and are time-saving for developers. |
| 34 | +Yet, they may show limited workflow engines, they are not open-sourcen have no open APIs and re not made for scalability. |
| 35 | + |
| 36 | +examples: _Airplane_ and _Superblocks_ |
| 37 | + |
| 38 | +## and ... Windmill |
| 39 | + |
| 40 | +We are working to build a solution with a clear approach (targeting developers who do not want to compromise on flexibility) |
| 41 | +and the aim to solve main issues (scalability, technicity for advanced use cases, open-source). |
| 42 | + |
| 43 | +We beliveve Windmill is different because: |
| 44 | + |
| 45 | +- it allows building internal tools through code much faster, without sacrificing on one side visibility and intuitivity and on the other side, |
| 46 | + control, reliability, performance, flexibility and scalability |
| 47 | +- it empowers semi-technical users to access and edit that code without being overwhelmed by the usual barriers to entry |
| 48 | + (git, IDE, local environments, secrets managements, etc.) |
| 49 | +- it is compatible with senior/staff software engineers high standards for production-grade yet flexible yet customizable with code. |
| 50 | + |
| 51 | +**We ourselves have our own limits**. We believe we can do better in terms of product education and having prettier UIs, all the rest is ready for scale. |
| 52 | + |
| 53 | +Please note that this comparison is made with at least **two biases**: 1. we want to convince you of the power of our product and 2. we are never safe from hiding things from ourselves about the strengths of competitors. |
| 54 | + |
| 55 | +Anyway, we are committed to the culture of transparency and of _face your own problems_, so if you have any objections or suggestions, |
| 56 | +please contact us at contact@windmill.dev. |
0 commit comments