Niagara Comparison

Owned by Aaron Sanchez
Last updated: Aug 11, 2021 by Kimberly Cruz (Unlicensed)
1 min read

What are the strengths/weaknesses of J2’s FIN 5 as compared to Tridium’s Niagara4 framework?

The strengths can be best presented in an in-person or online demonstration. Some of the key features include:

  • Mobile-friendly strategy: graphics, schedules, alarming, etc are all responsive across all device types. The majority of what you can do on a desktop, you will be able to do on tablet or smartphone (acknowledging alarms, creating/modifying schedules, global control, etc).

  • Faster to deploy due to our workflow productivity tools

  • Better end user experience - more intuitive, predictive navigation

  • Revolutionary framework for custom development: the modularity of FIN and our well-documented APIs enable the extension and addition of functionality in a far easier than with Niagara.

Weaknesses include:

  • Does not yet have the range of legacy drivers that have been developed by Niagara ecosystem partners.

  • Adjusting to newer technology takes time. A new platform such as FIN involves a new learning curve for those who've been working with Niagara for years and are comfortable with it, even though once learnt FIN enables projects to be completed much (30-50%) faster.

  • Lack of specifications written for FIN or our other OEM partners. More specs are written for Niagara, but this is changing, especially now that Siemens have Desigo Optic in the market.

FIN only uses the server-side JVM. Unlike Niagara, FIN does not use the JVM for the client side. 100% of our UI is in the browser so there is no requirement for an engineer to have a copy of FIN on their laptop in the way Workbench is required to program Niagara.