Zapier vs Make… what’s been your experience?
I’ve been building out more automations around Jobber lately and ran into something interesting. A lot of setups I see are using Zapier, but once workflows get more complex, the cost starts climbing ...
Forum Discussion
I've been running Zapier for my lawn care operation and hit the exact problem you're describing. My automations got shut down and I was forced toward a premium tier that didn't make sense for the volume I was running. Not a great experience.
I'm still on Zapier for now but actively looking at alternatives. N8N is on my radar — the idea of self-hosting and running local AI with no task limits or platform restrictions is exactly where I want to go. I have a computer science background so it's something I'm planning to tackle in the off season when I have the time to build it properly.
For anyone hitting Zapier's ceiling, Make seems worth exploring based on what I'm hearing. I just haven't made the jump yet personally.
The N8N route makes sense if you have the background for it and the off-season time to build it properly. Self-hosting (if you go that route) removes the task limit problem entirely.
One thing worth knowing before you commit to any platform though is that the constraint for Jobber users isn't typically which automation tool you pick, it's what Jobber data is available to feed into it. That's true whether you're on Zapier, Make, or N8N.
For what it's worth, I don't treat these as either/or. I regularly run workflows that use both Make and Zapier depending on which has the better app connection or the more cost-effective processing for that specific task. They're not competitors in practice, they're just different tools with different strengths.
For Jobber specifically, the bigger issue is getting access to the full event and field data in the first place. Once you have that, the platform choice becomes a lot more flexible.
