SO happy you saw this before investing to heavily in one automation provider. Candidly, most organizations utilize both tools. Theres no wrong ways, just more-optimal ways 🙌 www.xray.tools will also be super useful for you as you compare integrations on both tools!
🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation: 00:55 *🔄 Both Zapier and Make offer a variety of integrations with popular software, but Zapier currently boasts over 5,000 available integrations, while Make supports about 1,500 web apps.* 04:08 *💰 In terms of pricing, Make is generally more affordable than Zapier, with plans ranging from about $10 to $34 per month, compared to Zapier's plans starting at $30 per month.* 08:54 *🛠️ Both Zapier and Make are user-friendly for no-code automation, but Zapier's interface is simpler and more linear, while Make's interface resembles a flowchart, making it easier to understand complex automations.* 12:39 *💡 Zapier's unique features include interfaces, which allow users to create web pages for sharing automations, and a plugin for OpenAI's ChatGPT, enabling automated actions via chat prompts.* 14:02 *🌐 Make's unique features focus on advanced automated workflows, offering extensive support for API calls and web hooks, including tools for managing credentials and web hooks from a single location.* Made with HARPA AI
Thanks for the video!!! I have heard that when using make ...the builder has to always refresh the google permissions to secure the automations keep running, while Zapier does this under the hood so there is no need to be constantly worrying about refreshing the google permissions. Is this true??
You are welcome! That’s only half true. Needing to refresh your Google connection is only true if you’re automating with your personal @gmail account on make.com - if you’re using a google workspace with your custom domain (ex. @xray.tech is a google workspace domain) - then Make.com will handle the refresh for you, like Zapier does for both google workspaces and @gmail accounts. 👍
Make the best for operation consumption but Zapier is better When you need to Speed. You can use both by using webhooks between those platforms. In other hand, you can activate scenarios in Make, using a Make created webhook inside of a web parser in Zapier. Make offers 10.000 of operations only for $10, and has many tools That the other platform does not have. Zapier is more expensive. It cost about $30 for 750 operations. But its triggers activates instantly when the trigger event occurs. On Make, for Triggering, you have to establish how often the platform is going to check for new events. Both platforms are my favorites, and each one has unique characteristics for automation.
How is it possible that Make would be "significantly cheaper in the vast majority of cases" when every trigger counts as an Operation? Even if I scheduled only a single scenario to check for a new event every minute this would result in 43800 checks (hence 43800 ops) per month. This would be $29 on the annual core plan - just to check if our single(!) scenario got triggered. Imagine you had 5 scenarios which should be checked every minute (because I obviously want to trigger immediately in most cases): 219000 ops per month just for checking the triggers. If each of these scenarios has 3 steps on average and gets executed every 10 minutes on average then I end up with 240900 ops for each month. So I need at least the 300k core plan, which is ~$182/month (if I pay annually). And I have to pay this, even if the scenarios only get checked.
It is significantly cheaper on a per-operation basis. But as you noted, the checks can get WAY out of hand if you don't configure them intentionally. The way you cut down on all those operations is by specifying the schedule of when it 'checks' for new information, OR by utilizing webhooks (which will only 'cost' 1 operation when it is triggered, since webhooks never 'check' for new webhooks) See this screenshot for more insight: share.cleanshot.com/DRmJZTx5 Hope that helps!
@@XRayAutomation absolutely! Thanks for the clarification. Yesterday I also figured out that several of the modules I"ve been using as triggers could actually get replaced by webbooks of the particular app. So don't need to schedule the scenarios anymore. But they get triggered on what I would call "on-demand".
This is exactly what I needed for my no-code membership app for my neighborhood association. Perfect timing!
SO happy you saw this before investing to heavily in one automation provider. Candidly, most organizations utilize both tools. Theres no wrong ways, just more-optimal ways 🙌
www.xray.tools will also be super useful for you as you compare integrations on both tools!
I just finished from Make Academy but I'm gonna learn a lot from you going forward in my automation career
We’re excited for you!
Was it free?
very useful review. loved it and i got clear picture of both of them
Glad it was helpful!
Very interesting, extremely well explained. Thanks a lot !
Thank you!
Superb explanation
😎 superb comment
Hello glad I made it here. Coding I little on my end but yes Shopify 🔥🔥
You got this!
Take a look at xray.tools too!
Great video break down, thanks!
Glad you found it helpful!
🎯 Key Takeaways for quick navigation:
00:55 *🔄 Both Zapier and Make offer a variety of integrations with popular software, but Zapier currently boasts over 5,000 available integrations, while Make supports about 1,500 web apps.*
04:08 *💰 In terms of pricing, Make is generally more affordable than Zapier, with plans ranging from about $10 to $34 per month, compared to Zapier's plans starting at $30 per month.*
08:54 *🛠️ Both Zapier and Make are user-friendly for no-code automation, but Zapier's interface is simpler and more linear, while Make's interface resembles a flowchart, making it easier to understand complex automations.*
12:39 *💡 Zapier's unique features include interfaces, which allow users to create web pages for sharing automations, and a plugin for OpenAI's ChatGPT, enabling automated actions via chat prompts.*
14:02 *🌐 Make's unique features focus on advanced automated workflows, offering extensive support for API calls and web hooks, including tools for managing credentials and web hooks from a single location.*
Made with HARPA AI
Thanks for the video!!! I have heard that when using make ...the builder has to always refresh the google permissions to secure the automations keep running, while Zapier does this under the hood so there is no need to be constantly worrying about refreshing the google permissions. Is this true??
You are welcome!
That’s only half true.
Needing to refresh your Google connection is only true if you’re automating with your personal @gmail account on make.com - if you’re using a google workspace with your custom domain (ex. @xray.tech is a google workspace domain) - then Make.com will handle the refresh for you, like Zapier does for both google workspaces and @gmail accounts. 👍
Make the best for operation consumption but Zapier is better When you need to Speed. You can use both by using webhooks between those platforms. In other hand, you can activate scenarios in Make, using a Make created webhook inside of a web parser in Zapier.
Make offers 10.000 of operations only for $10, and has many tools That the other platform does not have. Zapier is more expensive. It cost about $30 for 750 operations. But its triggers activates instantly when the trigger event occurs. On Make, for Triggering, you have to establish how often the platform is going to check for new events.
Both platforms are my favorites, and each one has unique characteristics for automation.
Thank you for the info!
Please can you make comparism between Zapier and Power Automate? Or Make and Power Automate.
It’s on the list! We’ll get to it in 2024.
Thanks for asking!
Phenomenal script!
Our content team thanks you!
Thank you!
You're welcome! Let us know what else you'd like to see on the channel!
How is it possible that Make would be "significantly cheaper in the vast majority of cases" when every trigger counts as an Operation?
Even if I scheduled only a single scenario to check for a new event every minute this would result in 43800 checks (hence 43800 ops) per month.
This would be $29 on the annual core plan - just to check if our single(!) scenario got triggered.
Imagine you had 5 scenarios which should be checked every minute (because I obviously want to trigger immediately in most cases):
219000 ops per month just for checking the triggers.
If each of these scenarios has 3 steps on average and gets executed every 10 minutes on average then I end up with 240900 ops for each month.
So I need at least the 300k core plan, which is ~$182/month (if I pay annually).
And I have to pay this, even if the scenarios only get checked.
It is significantly cheaper on a per-operation basis. But as you noted, the checks can get WAY out of hand if you don't configure them intentionally.
The way you cut down on all those operations is by specifying the schedule of when it 'checks' for new information, OR by utilizing webhooks (which will only 'cost' 1 operation when it is triggered, since webhooks never 'check' for new webhooks)
See this screenshot for more insight: share.cleanshot.com/DRmJZTx5
Hope that helps!
@@XRayAutomation absolutely! Thanks for the clarification. Yesterday I also figured out that several of the modules I"ve been using as triggers could actually get replaced by webbooks of the particular app. So don't need to schedule the scenarios anymore. But they get triggered on what I would call "on-demand".
Zapier will have to end up changing their licensing model. No way a webhook is a “premium” app…
Time will tell. We just want you to be an informed buyer!
Ofc make is the best for beginners
Make.
What is your favorite integration?
Zapier is not user friendly and difficult to use. As a novice user. Make is much easier
Happy you found what works for you!