We asked ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, and Perplexity about Make. Here are their unfiltered opinions and who they recommend.

Two views of the same scan — by the questions buyers ask, and by the engine answering them.
Where the 62/100 comes from — reds are where AI hurts Make most.
The four engines rarely agree — the gap is the story.
Kairosy asks ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, and Perplexity the questions real buyers ask about Make — is it worth it, common complaints, head-to-head comparisons, best-in-category shortlists, trust checks. Every answer is classified (positive / neutral / negative / prefers-competitor / doesn't-know) and scored; the 0–100 score is the weighted average. Quotes on this page are unedited engine output from the 2026-08-05 scan.
Three of these four answers hand the buyer a different platform. The fourth supplies the reason.
Which visual automation platform is best? Make — that topic reaches 98. What should I use instead? n8n and Zapier, from the same four engines, and the topic drops to 26. A 62/100 AI reputation with an At risk verdict is the gap between those two sentences: every answer names the brand, 52% read favourably, 42% end in a recommendation.
“n8n — Best for self-hosting, code control, and AI-native…”
Claude's replacement list opens on n8n and sells it on execution-based pricing rather than per-operation billing — Make's own pricing model, named as the thing worth escaping.
“However, it does have a steep learning curve for…”
Gemini's verdict on whether make.com is worth buying turns on one clause: a steep learning curve for beginners, delivered without a counterweight.
“Top picks for Make.com alternatives are Zapier, n8n, and…”
Perplexity returns a ranked three — Zapier for ease, n8n for self-hosting, Workato for enterprise governance — and Make appears nowhere in the list drawn up about it.
“If your buyer wants the easiest setup and the broadest app ecosystem, Zapier is usually the safer…”
ChatGPT frames Zapier as the safer pick for the easiest setup and the broadest app ecosystem, leaving Make the buyer willing to trade a steeper curve for power.
Same scan, same questions — Make in the competitive context AI itself brought up. Peer names link to their own live reports.
The same two engines produce all four answers below: the support record twice, the replacement list once, and the verdict on whether make.com is worth paying for.
What are the most common complaints or downsides of make.com?
“Poor customer support — users report slow ticket responses, closures without…”
Asked what goes wrong with make.com, Claude leads with support — slow ticket responses, tickets closed without resolution. That is what a buyer reads while deciding whether anyone will be there the night a scenario breaks in production.
What are the best alternatives to make.com? Name the top picks.
“n8n — Best for self-hosting, code control, and AI-native…”
Claude's reply to the replacement question is a ranked list Make does not appear on, headed by n8n for self-hosting and code control. Everyone who types that question is already paying for Make.
Is make.com worth it for visual workflow automation platform? Give a short honest take.
“However, it does have a steep learning curve for…”
A trial converts or dies on the worth-it question, and Gemini's take is one objection: a steep learning curve for beginners. Anyone weighing make.com against a weekend of setup hears only what learning it costs.
What are the most common complaints or downsides of make.com?
“on its notoriously slow and unresponsive customer…”
Gemini answers the complaints question with support described as notoriously slow and unresponsive. Make argues its reliability at length on its own site, and not one line of that argument survives into this sentence.
Two jobs, in the order they cost money: take the replacement question off n8n and Zapier, then change what the review sites say about setup and support.
Zapier and n8n are being handed the replacement question and the direct comparison by three engines at once, and the argument they win on is pricing predictability. A make.com versus Zapier page carrying quotable operation-cost and feature figures puts Make's own case into the documents these models read.
'Steep learning curve' and 'poor support' are being read off review sites, so they will keep returning until those entries change. Answering the support threads in public and publishing onboarding evidence a model can lift edits the source, not the summary.
Data from a live Kairosy scan on 2026-08-05. Quotes are real engine outputs and may change as models update.
Fixes decay as models refresh — set up AI brand monitoring to catch the next shift in Make's answers.
Make owners or competitors? Scan and trace your AI reputation with Kairosy.
Track your brand across ChatGPT, Perplexity, Gemini, and Claude — and get an AI Presence Score that shows whether AI engines recommend you, misunderstand you, or ignore you.

Make scores 62/100 — verdict: At risk — in Kairosy's scan of 24 real buyer questions asked across ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, and Perplexity on 2026-08-05.
Partly. AI mentions Make in 100% of relevant answers, but only 42% actively recommend it — the rest stay neutral or go blank.
ChatGPT, at 59/100 across 6 answers — versus Perplexity's 66/100. Engine gaps like this usually mean the brand's story lives in sources one model reads and another doesn't.
Yes. AI answers echo sources — review sites, comparison pages, forums — and those can be fixed. The fix plan above lists the moves for Make; a free Kairosy scan generates the same for any brand.

open-source workflow automation tool

AI agent builder platform

AI music generator

AI meeting assistant for sales teams

AI novel writing tool

text-to-video AI generator