Forum Discussion

DrewR's avatar
DrewR
Contributor 2
2 months ago

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 pretty fast.

I switched a few of them over to Make.com just to test it, and it’s handled everything I’ve thrown at it so far. Feels like you get a bit more control over the logic, and it’s easier to actually see what’s going on in the workflow. Pricing hasn’t ramped up nearly as fast either.

Curious if anyone else has tried it, or if most people are still sticking with Zapier?

ai
software

11 Replies

  • TurfT's avatar
    TurfT
    Contributor 4
    21 days ago

    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.

    • Randy_Warner's avatar
      Randy_Warner
      Contributor 4
      21 days ago

      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.

  • Randy_Warner's avatar
    Randy_Warner
    Contributor 4
    27 days ago

    Agree with you from a UI perspective DrewR​. The visual layout of Make helps me understand the workflow better. The reality is that both tools work. The real constraint for Jobber users isn't which platform you choose; it's what data is actually available to build on.

    Zapier's native Jobber connector covers the basics well enough for simple workflows. Where it tends to fall short is when you need to trigger on specific Jobber events or pass custom field data downstream. That's when people hit the wall and assume the platform is the problem.

    There are tools in the Jobber app marketplace that extend what's available to build on. For Zapier users, that means access to 50+ triggers and actions — including custom field data and events the native connector doesn't expose. For Make users, it means webhook support for Jobber events, which you can point directly at a Make scenario for real-time triggers rather than relying on polling.

    In both cases the platform isn't the bottleneck, it's whether you have the right Jobber data to work with in the first place.

  • Chi_Cleaning's avatar
    Chi_Cleaning
    Contributor 3
    29 days ago

    We started with Zapier, but once our workflows got more complex it became harder to manage. We ended up hiring a company to build and maintain some custom automations and API integrations for us.

     

    • Randy_Warner's avatar
      Randy_Warner
      Contributor 4
      27 days ago

      This is a really common path — Zapier works until it doesn't, then the complexity forces a decision between learning a new platform or bringing someone in.

      The native Zapier connector covers the basics, but there's other options out there that extend this — including events and custom field data the native connector doesn't make available. A lot of businesses find it handles the complex workflows without needing custom development.

      What kind of automations were you trying to build when things got complicated?

      • Chi_Cleaning's avatar
        Chi_Cleaning
        Contributor 3
        22 days ago

        We tried automating our lead process so form submissions would create customers, jobs, and estimates automatically. We also built pricing rules to send rough price ranges based on the services selected.

        The problem was that we were connecting too many tools through Zapier. When something broke, leads wouldn’t flow correctly, estimates wouldn’t get created, and we risked losing potential customers.

  • jgreene626's avatar
    jgreene626
    Contributor 2
    1 month ago

    I made the same switch. Once your workflows get beyond a handful of steps Zapier's pricing becomes hard to justify, and Make's visual builder makes it a lot easier to debug when something breaks. I think Make has an easier learning curve than n8n but it still took me awhile to get the hang of. 

     

  • Poriechkin's avatar
    Poriechkin
    Contributor 2
    1 month ago

    I prefere Make to Zapier as it can handle multiple brunching and easier to navigate and Make he's more abilities. 

  • Mohamed_Ch's avatar
    Mohamed_Ch
    Contributor 2
    2 months ago

    did you try of n8n or heard of it you can setup it in private vps for 5$ or 10$ and run it and build anything you want

  • HUGEHomePros's avatar
    HUGEHomePros
    Jobber Ambassador
    2 months ago

    I'm a zapier guy. I have so many automations set up through there. As far as the cost, that's definitely a consideration but how much time could you save? Are the automations actually useful? I like the cost because it keeps me honest. I'm not just automated for the sake of automating and I don't think it's unreasonable if it is an automation I use. THey also have an AI function that can pretty much tie everything together so it gives you a lot of help with that regard.

    More than anything though, if you think Make works, use it! I didn't even know it existed before I read this post so run with it. I just know that zapier has a TON of automation opportunities so that's why we started there.