What I like best about Make is its flexibility and powerful visual workflow builder. As a small business owner, I've used Make to develop AI-assisted customer communication, automated response routing, and integrations between different business systems.

The visual interface makes it easier to understand complex processes, identify problems, and improve workflows without building everything from scratch. I especially appreciate the ability to combine APIs, conditional logic, and AI services in one platform.

Make gives small businesses access to sophisticated automation capabilities that would otherwise require significant custom development and expense. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

My biggest frustration with Make is the steep learning curve when building more advanced automations. While the visual interface is excellent, troubleshooting complex scenarios involving multiple routers, filters, API connections, and error handlers can become unnecessarily time-consuming.

Debugging isn't always intuitive, and identifying why a particular route or mapping failed can require considerable trial and error.

Execution-based pricing is another concern. Testing and troubleshooting complex workflows can consume credits quickly, especially when AI services are involved.

I'd like to see more transparent credit estimates, stronger debugging tools, and a safer, easier way to test entire workflows before deploying them to production.

Make is a powerful platform, but there's definitely room to improve the experience for small businesses developing sophisticated automations. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

I like the visual workflow builder and the ability of connecting different apps without code. I also liked that price is flexible and isn't too high for small projects. And it's cool that I can make my own 'custom app' when there isn't an existing one. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

I don't like that I can't "disable route" without unlinking on a single route (with router I can but it would be much easier to make this feature). I wish Make had a feature that shows the estimated credit usage for the next 24 hours when enabling a scheduled scenario. For example, if a scenario runs every 20 minutes, it would be really helpful to see how many credits it might consume per day. I've accidentally left scenarios running overnight before and ended up wasting around 2,000 credits without even realizing it. A simple cost estimate or warning before enabling a scenario would be a great improvement. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

I like how intuitive it is, and the easy way it integrates with other applications Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

What I like least about Make is that some configurations can be complicated, especially when working with webhooks, APIs, and multiple connected applications. When a scenario presents errors, identifying the cause and solving it can take quite some time. I also think that credit consumption during testing is an aspect that could be improved. I would like it to offer more intuitive diagnostic tools and automatic solutions for errors. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

What I appreciate the most is how much time it actually saves me every single week. The visual interface makes setting up automations very straightforward, but the biggest upside for me is the peace of mind. I can finally sleep peacefully at night knowing that my most time-consuming daily processes are just running automatically in the background without me having to babysit them. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

While the visual interface is great, the learning curve can be quite steep once you start building more complex scenarios. Understanding how to properly use iterators, aggregators, and mapping complex data structures took me quite a bit of trial and error. Also, sometimes the error messages aren't very intuitive, which makes troubleshooting a bit frustrating. Adding more plain-English explanations or beginner-friendly tooltips for those advanced modules would be a huge improvement. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

Make is a versatile visual automation platform that allows users to connect various services like WordPress, webhooks, HTTP requests, and OpenAI into complex workflows. It offers powerful automation capabilities with features like filters, retries, error handling, and integrations, making it suitable for both simple and advanced business processes.

The platform is designed to be user-friendly, enabling users to visually design, test, and adjust workflows without needing extensive technical knowledge. This flexibility makes it an excellent choice for businesses looking to streamline operations and reduce development and maintenance efforts.

Make's value proposition lies in its ability to handle both straightforward automations and intricate logic within the same platform, providing a cost-effective solution for complex workflow needs. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

What I like best about Make is the flexibility of its visual automation platform. I use it to connect WordPress, webhooks, HTTP requests and OpenAI in fairly complex workflows without having to build everything from scratch.

Once the scenario is correctly configured, the automation is very powerful: filters, retries, error handling and integrations make it possible to create robust business processes while keeping the workflow understandable visually.

I also appreciate that Make can handle both simple automations and much more advanced logic within the same platform. Make offers very good value for the price, especially for complex workflows that would otherwise require custom development. For my use case, being able to connect WordPress, OpenAI, webhooks and other services in one visual platform saves both development time and ongoing maintenance effort. The value is strong, particularly as the automation becomes more complex. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

We use Make for orchestration that needs to remain visible to both development and operations. A typical scenario might start with a Custom Webhook, pass through Routers and Filters, and then call external services through HTTP modules. This setup makes it easy to adjust a branch when a business rule changes, without having to ship another version of our API. Error Handlers are where the platform became much more reliable for us. We use Retry, Resume, Skip, Commit, and Rollback depending on the type of failure, and Incomplete Executions give us a way to recover after fixing the underlying issue instead of treating every run as disposable. We really noticed the difference during a synchronization when a provider started returning intermittent rate limits. Our earlier scenarios would simply stop and leave us guessing which records had actually made it through, but adding a retry path made the flow far more predictable. Data Stores have also been useful for keeping small pieces of state, supporting idempotency, and maintaining references between executions. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

What I still miss are stronger diff and review tools between scenario versions. As scenarios grow, it becomes harder to track what changed and why. To keep things manageable, we try to keep flows small and move more complex logic into .NET when automation shifts from orchestration toward core application code. Make is great for connecting systems, but business rules shouldn’t quietly evolve inside visual workflows that aren’t being properly reviewed. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

I love the ability to create automations with almost any platform and how Make is constantly evolving to make automations easier and better. I love that I am able to use AI to help build scenarios but also include AI performance in my scenarios. Once a scenario is set up correctly, it runs perfectly and consistently. The price for Make is very reasonable considering everything they offer. Support has been responsive and helpful. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

If you make an infinity loop accidentally, you can zap all your credits and even go into a deficit. I did that and when I reluctantly purchased more credits to help get me to end of the month when my supply would renew, my extra credits went towards the deficit. That was a learning experience. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

I really love the highly intuitive visual drag-and-drop builder. It makes it simple to set up complex, multi-step workflows without needing to write any custom code, and the whole process feels straightforward and easy to manage. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

The initial learning curve can feel quite steep for beginners, especially compared to simpler automation tools. It takes time to get comfortable with the more complex parts, like error handling and data mapping, and to really master how they work. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

If there is an award for UI for iPaaS tools, Make/Integromat will absolutely take it. It has one of the best-polished UI for iPaaS products, is highly intuitive, and has a single dashboard that you don't need to go from one panel to another. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

The name change is not the greatest idea; the word Make has too many meanings and a Google search will provide several items, some of which are unrelated to the tool; perhaps it's nostalgia, but I like the previous name of Integromat. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

What I really like about Make.com is how easy it is to use. I can build automations relatively quickly and connect a wide range of different applications. The platform is constantly evolving, which gives me greater confidence in its long-term future. I've been using Make.com for quite a few years now, and it has never let me down - performance is good and many problems you can solve with online help guides. Pricing is reasonable. BTW, Make has its own AI Assistant. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

Make.com doesn't always keep up with changes to third-party APIs, and not all API methods are supported. However, this isn't a major issue. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.