Thank you!
I will coordinate with my manager so that we can get all parties involved.
I really appreciate your help!
The biggest issue for me after Appsheet’s acquisition by Google is that the team seemed to shift focus toward attracting new users, while long-requested features from existing users were left behind. When Appsheet Database was first announced, I thought, “This could be great—maybe faster and more reliable.” But after waiting 2.5 years for its release, I found it so limited that I’ve stuck with Google Sheets instead.
I’ve been using Appsheet since 2018, and honestly, I don’t recall anyone in the community asking for Desktop or Mobile UI improvements. I don’t use those features, and they took forever to implement. In fact, most of the major features released in the last 4–5 years haven’t been useful for me at all. I can’t even remember a new feature that I actually use—maybe Bots, but that’s about it.
Because of that, I’ve felt stuck. I haven’t updated or upgraded my app in years, and now I’m in the process of moving away from Appsheet altogether. It’s disappointing, but I hope new users are finding enough value to make up for it.
Thank you @Suvrutt_Gurjar,
This is very useful! Please note the product team is actively looking into this.
Regards,
Jose Federico Arteaga
Understaffed and underfunded….UNSUPPORTIVE, imho… They’re making so much money on AI tokens for every AI model that hallucinates every 5 minutes…and all that compute time. The term understaffed and underfunded should not even come into play. Because if they wanted to SUPPORT devs, AND their own products, THEY COULD… They choose not to… But it’s plain to see where they put their time and effort. And I get it…but yet, I don’t get it… They have too many products and just stop caring about the ones NOT contributing to their record high of $350 Billion revenue last year. And $200 billion of that is straight profit That is not “underfunded”. And if they are understaffed, maybe they should hire some people with that $200 Billion bucks they made… Thats just my opinion…Do better, Google… 
I totally agree with you — I’ve been facing a similar issue lately. AppSheet still feels powerful for basic workflows, but when you try to build something more advanced or integrate automation smoothly, it quickly becomes frustrating. I’ve also noticed that even small updates sometimes break existing setups, which slows down development.
It’s disappointing because, like you said, other platforms are evolving fast with AI and better UI tools. Hopefully Google starts listening to long-time users soon — there’s still huge potential here if they take it seriously.
Just to add my thoughts to this.
I develop apps that help the business I work for. It is a side gig of mine and though I am the most technical “geek” in the company, I am not a coder or systems admin person of any type.
Our business is outgrowing the core plan so before I move to Enterprise I am looking around to see what can be done on other platforms.
When I first looked at AppSheet and other platforms, it was the offline sync that sold me on AppSheet. Other platforms now have offline sync, but it is nowhere near as robust as AppSheets, so I am staying with AppSheet, as it is critical to our on site works.
But if I compare what AppSheet can do to Glide Apps, they have far more integrations with the likes of MS teams and DociSign. My business could really make use of these features. They also have a Kaban Board with Drag and Drop functionality, which is far easier to use than anything AppSheet can do.
If Glide had a robust offline sync and edit function, I would likely be moving to them. In 4 years time when I review the whole process again, I might be able to move if AppSheet has not kept up with other platforms.
I completely agree, and this very much mirrors my own experience.
The biggest surprise for me has been how quickly the gap has closed.
With AppSheet, I’ve spent years learning expressions, workarounds and ways of navigating around platform limitations. API integration, payment processing and even relatively simple UI requirements can become projects in themselves.
And, unfortunately, the lack of significant UI improvements and the persistence of long-standing bugs increasingly gives me the impression that AppSheet is no longer receiving the level of attention and development it once did.
Our own experience with AI-assisted development has really brought this home.
Something that took us around eight months to develop in AppSheet has been substantially rebuilt in just over three weeks using AI.
And it isn’t simply a copy.
The new application has a superb UI, works properly across desktops, tablets and mobiles, is considerably faster and, frankly, is much more enjoyable to use.
API integration has been another eye-opener. Things that were difficult in AppSheet — such as calling payment APIs, processing responses and handling the resulting workflow — can now be built with AI guiding you through each step.
Then there is reliability and support.
We’re on an Enterprise Plus plan, yet one of our business-critical apps developed a show-stopping synchronisation error that effectively rendered the application unusable.
Even rolling back to earlier versions didn’t solve it because the synchronisation error persisted.
Support was unable to identify the underlying cause, so we eventually had to turn to the community forums and investigate it ourselves.
The culprit?
A calculated field that had previously passed AppSheet’s own tests and had been working.
That’s quite worrying when you are running business-critical applications. 
Then add two more significant advantages of moving away:
No per-user licensing barrier as the application scales.
And perhaps most importantly, we have access to and control of the code rather than being completely dependent on a proprietary platform.
Like you, I don’t regret AppSheet. It allowed us to build sophisticated applications without employing a large development team, and I’ve learnt a huge amount from using it.
But your description of “a low-code platform in a no-code world” really hits the nail on the head.
The question isn’t whether AppSheet was valuable. It absolutely was.
The question is where does AppSheet go from here?
Because when something that took us eight months to build can be substantially recreated in three weeks, with a better UI, better performance, easier API integration and ownership of the resulting code, the economics have fundamentally changed.
The workarounds we once accepted as the price of low-code are becoming increasingly difficult to justify. 
I absolutely agree with you, but I’d like to emphasize that while AI makes coding trivial, it doesn’t necessarily do the engineering. An app vibe-coded by an inexperienced developer is almost certainly going to be riddled with “gaps”: inefficiencies, bugs, security holes, and the like. You really need someone with a deeper understanding of software to design a robust, business-grade app. AppSheet does provide a strong (but decaying) foundation on which to build apps
For sure — I completely agree with you @Steve
Using AI for development is a bit like working with a very fast junior developer.
It can produce an extraordinary amount of functionality very quickly — but it will also make mistakes. The problems often appear later, when the application starts behaving strangely or the data becomes inconsistent.
That has certainly been my experience, particularly around data modelling.
AI will quite happily create several tables containing similar information instead of maintaining a clear single version of the truth. That can eventually lead to duplication, inconsistencies and unnecessary complexity.
And that is the danger. 
To a non-technical user, the app can look glossy, all-singing and all-dancing while having some fairly fundamental architectural weaknesses underneath.
That is where experience still matters.
You still need to challenge the AI:
Why does this table exist?
Where is the single source of truth?
What happens when this scales?
What happens when something fails?
Where AI really changes the game, though, is the speed of iteration.
Once you spot a weakness, you can ask it to explain the problem, restructure the data model (or do it yourself), refactor the code and help test the solution remarkably quickly.
So I don’t see AI as removing the need for software engineering.
I see it as a massive force multiplier for someone who already understands systems and software engineering.
And I agree about AppSheet. One of its strengths has always been that it imposes structure and gives people a solid foundation for building business applications. The big question is whether that advantage remains enough as AI development tools become more capable.
AI can build the house incredibly quickly. You still need someone who understands whether the foundations are sound.
On a separate note, I was genuinely sorry to read that you have left Google. Like many others on these forums, I owe you a huge thank you for your contribution over the years.
You brought an enormous amount of knowledge, patience and passion to the AppSheet community. If the wider Google support and innovation teams had shown the same level of commitment and passion that you did, I suspect AppSheet might be in a very different position today.
Well said about AI - @Steve and @Harriswe
@Harriswe 's following statement very much resonates with my thinking about AI.
I may replace the word junior with senior. I recently used AI for creating complex data migration scripts and it created wonderful, efficient Google apps scripts in two days which manually could have taken probably weeks if not months. AI of course needs timely nudging and course corrections. Here Steve’s statement very much makes sense.
Finally, I am sure that @Harriswe 's following statement about Steve will resonate with the entire community.
Steve is still the mainstay of the community with his regular guiding contributions.