What do users say about Make?

I like how easy Make is to use and the no-code way of working. Having agents help me build faster is useful. I value the hook feature and the ability to schedule tasks. Make saves me time because it runs automatically on a schedule, and the learning curve is fast. Connecting with Claude helped me get up to speed. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

My connections tend to break all of a sudden, and they should be more robust. I wish more templates were available. I found the initial setup slightly difficult, but the learning curve was fast, and connecting with Claude helped me get up to speed. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

Ease of use. I also like that there is an academy portal to learn more about make. The price of the plan I have is reasonable ($10/month). Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

1. Missing integrations for some key platforms I use.

2. The only way to organize scenarios is via folders . There is no way to create subfolders or organize scenarios via tags, etc. This is one of main issues I have with make.com (together with item #1).

3. There is no way to search datastore via UI. The only way to find something is by going page-to-page.

4. Affiliation payouts minim are way too high. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

What I like most about Make is that it raised my ceiling. I’m not a developer, but working with Claude and Make’s building blocks, I can describe a problem in plain language and usually have a working solution the same day. Scenarios map naturally to steps, and the generic API modules let me reach services even when there isn’t a prebuilt module. I can administer our phone system through Make without handling a raw API key. Webhooks let me build a phone menu that responds in real time, data stores hold prospect conversations and other state without needing a separate database, and execution history lets me see which steps ran and where something stopped instead of guessing. I can also expose scenarios as tools Claude can call to query live systems. Make connects our property, phone and SMS, Google Workspace, and AI systems. Rental inquiries get a tour and booking link within seconds, listing data stays current, and most showings book without anyone on my team touching them. I get relevant pings and one morning digest instead of constant notifications, and people with appointments get notified when a property rents. Make lets routine work happen at machine speed and surfaces the things that actually need a human. Projects I’d never have commissioned a developer for now just get built. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

I found getting started with Make daunting. Creating even simple scenarios felt foreign, and I needed AI to walk me through them step by step, with issues and troubleshooting along the way. I’ve also run into quiet failures: `split()` can shift fields when an item is blank without showing an error, and `AddRecord` returns an empty value instead of what it wrote. An `Ignore` error handler discarded the whole bundle rather than just the failed logging step. Timezone settings also caught me off guard and led to alerts at 4 AM. I can’t make partial scenario edits through the API, so changing one filter means retrieving and resending the whole blueprint; for my largest scenario, I had to build a separate scenario to do that. Expressions can save successfully and then fail at runtime, deactivating the scenario, and pushing the previous version doesn’t clear the invalid state. A save-time validation step would help. Four of these five issues share the same problem: Make knows something went wrong but doesn’t tell me loudly enough. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

I like the versatility and ease of Make. Although I had no programming knowledge, I learned to use it and now I would say I master it. Initially, the setup was difficult, but gradually I understood the logic and now it seems simple to me. I use it to automate my clients' processes, including repetitive tasks and content generation. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

Initially, I found it difficult to set up Make, although gradually I understood the logic and now it seems simple to me. I also find it a bit expensive; I think there should be larger packages for people like me, with more than 100 active automations. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

I primarily use Make to automate recurring and time-critical processes for our holiday apartments. I've linked scenarios with Telegram or my emails, so an integrated bot automatically responds to guest feedback, invoice requests, or questions. I particularly like that Claude can work in Make and I can set up and continuously improve processes. I also appreciate the collaboration with Airtable because it allows me to keep the data centralized. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

The setup was quite difficult for me because I had to do everything manually, and there was no bot at the time to help optimize or set up scenarios. Currently, I have no other complaints. I haven't yet explored how it can be further integrated, and I'm still very much at the surface with the scenarios. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

Make makes it easy for me to connect the different LLMs I’m using, including Claude and ChatGPT. It’s very easy to use, and I use the scheduling function quite a bit without difficulty managing my schedules. The initial setup was pretty easy and Codex-driven. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

I’d like Make to give me a heads-up as I use tokens, so I don’t get stuck unexpectedly running out because some actions have a high burn rate. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

I use Make to automate things like uploading receipts to Google Sheets and having a WhatsApp bot check availability and answer customers. I put lead information in one place, and Make does the other work, which saves me a lot of time. It’s easy to use even though I don’t know anything about code, and it looks nice. I also like using ChatGPT with Make; the ChatGPT plugin did all the work for my WhatsApp business automation. Setting up Make was easy and perfect. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

I found setting up the automation for my WhatsApp business very hard, and it took me about a week. I’m very new to this, so I don’t really know what else could be improved. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

The integration of different SaaS components simplifies my life and saves me from having to integrate them myself. The MCP connector with AI helps me a lot in creating new scenarios and debugging them. I also appreciate the Iterator and MCP features for automating, simplifying debugging, and creating or adapting scenarios to new elements. Make simplifies usage, and the installation was very easy. It solves integration problems between my tools, allows me to offer an end-to-end user experience, and saves me administrative time. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

I think a little help with scenario creation and error management would be useful, with recommendations on common errors. I would also like to have guidance on when to ignore an error and explanations with AI to understand what is happening and prevent everything from breaking. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

I really like it. These days, i'm often sketching out complex REST API workflows inot make.com, and rebasing them into google services at a later time. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

I think it's incredibly annoying that when I click on certain make.com module outputs, the renderer will crash my browser because the payload is too big. We're talking about text here, i'm not sure why a 10,000, 20,000 or een 20,000,000 character block of text would be crashing my browser. This only happens in make.com.

Additionally, very large and complex scenarios with lots of modules will struggle to run/render on even strong machines. That seems silly to me. There's some kind of baseline processing inefficicney there that makes no sense. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

I like that Make has many integrations and is very visual, versatile, and easy to use. I can connect with my clients' systems, Google and Microsoft suites, and various AI providers and PDF readers. These integrations save me time compared to using APIs, and I can choose the AI model that best suits the process I'm automating. I can also easily create processes, and the initial setup and onboarding were very straightforward. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

I find it a bit difficult to create libraries of reusable routines or processes; it can be done, but it's somewhat complicated. Some flows, like loops, are sometimes not entirely clear, especially conditionals, although they have improved a lot. I also find it a bit tedious to configure all the fields of each module, which makes the process a bit slow, especially when there are many parameters to configure. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.