Make AI Agents vs InfuseOS: Agentic Automation Platform vs Autonomous Productivity OS

Agentic automation is finally going mainstream, and Make is one of the most credible incumbents pushing it forward. But there’s a key question behind the hype:

Do you want a platform to build agentic workflows, or do you want an OS that executes them for you from a simple command?

Make AI Agents is Make’s evolution of its visual automation platform into agentic automation. InfuseOS is built as an autonomous productivity OS: a pre-trained Chief of Staff that can initiate and schedule multi-integration execution flows with minimal configuration.

What Is Make AI Agents?

Make AI Agents is Make’s agentic automation capability embedded into its no-code automation platform. Make positions AI Agents as enabling smarter automation that can adapt in real time inside Make’s environment.Source: https://www.make.com/en/blog/make-ai-agents

Make also has a dedicated product page for AI Agents and states they’re available on all plans.Source: https://www.make.com/en/ai-agents

Make provides a how-to guide on building AI Agents and explicitly frames it as: automation that can figure out steps to reach a goal without defining every action in advance.Source: https://www.make.com/en/how-to-guides/build-ai-agents

What Is InfuseOS?

InfuseOS is an Autonomous Productivity OS that lets people initiate and schedule multi-integration automation flows with a simple command.

InfuseOS is built around:intent → plan → act → verify → store context → iterate

Instead of turning users into automation designers, InfuseOS is positioned as a pre-trained Chief of Staff that can execute multi-step work across email, calendar, docs, tasks, social, chat, and files, while keeping the user in control (semi-autonomous or autonomous modes).

Note: This section reflects InfuseOS’s product positioning and intended capabilities (not third-party claims).

The Real Difference (in one sentence)

Make AI Agents makes your automations more intelligent. InfuseOS makes intelligence act across your entire work stack with minimal building.

First Experience: A Real-World Test

The scenario: “Weekly operating rhythm”

You want a system to:

Collect weekly updates (email, docs, tasks)
Summarize status by project
Identify blockers and owners
Draft a weekly update message
Post it to Slack
Create follow-up tasks
Schedule the next check-in block

Using Make AI Agents

What it feels like in practice:

You operate inside Make’s visual orchestration environment.
You build an agent and give it tools and inputs, then wire it into workflows that run on triggers or schedules.
Make’s framing is explicitly about goal-driven automation that reduces the need to define every step in advance.Source: https://www.make.com/en/how-to-guides/build-ai-agents

Where Make shines here

Visual orchestration: it’s built for seeing and controlling flows.
Agentic capability inside a mature automation product: great for teams already living in Make.
Breadth of actions: Make markets large action coverage, and press materials highlight “30,000+ available actions.”Source: https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/make-launches-make-ai-agents-adding-real-time-intelligence-to-no-code-automation-302426790.html

Where friction shows up

The center of gravity is still “build the automation,” even if it’s more agentic now.
Real-world adoption still depends on a builder mindset: specifying inputs, tools, triggers, and reliability patterns.

Using InfuseOS

What it aims to feel like:

You issue one command:“Compile weekly updates across projects, highlight blockers, draft the update, post to Slack, create follow-ups, and block time for next week.”
InfuseOS plans the workflow across tools, executes it, and verifies outcomes.
It stores durable context (projects, people, preferences) so the workflow improves over time rather than being rebuilt.

Where InfuseOS shines here

Low-friction delegation: command-first, not scenario-first.
Cross-domain execution: designed for email + calendar + docs + tasks + chat in one run.
Persistent context: designed so repeated workflows get faster and more personalized.

Where trade-offs can exist

If your team already has dedicated automation builders and wants a visual orchestration canvas as the primary UI, Make remains one of the strongest choices.

Summary: Make AI Agents is powerful for teams who want an agentic layer inside a visual automation builder. InfuseOS is the better fit for users who want an autonomous productivity OS that executes cross-domain work from a simple command.

Feature Comparison: Make AI Agents vs InfuseOS

Category

Make AI Agents

InfuseOS

Core product identity

Agentic automation inside a no-code automation platform

Autonomous productivity OS across domains

Setup model

Build agents + workflows in a visual builder

Command-first execution, minimal configuration goal

Primary strength

Orchestrating workflows visually with adaptable steps

Cross-domain execution with a unified brain and persistent context

“Agentic” framing

Goal-driven automation inside Make

Pre-trained Chief of Staff that executes and verifies

Scale model

Strong for ops-led automation programs

Strong for individual and team execution without builders

Best at

Builder-driven automation with visibility and control

Delegation-driven automation with persistent context

Make AI Agents’ Key Strengths (why it’s a serious competitor)

1) Best-in-class visual orchestration

Make’s brand is “visual-first.” If you want to see every step, branch, and data mapping, it’s a strong environment.

2) Clear push into agentic automation

Make explicitly positions AI Agents as enabling automation that adapts in real time inside its platform.Source: https://www.make.com/en/blog/make-ai-agents

3) Availability and packaging

Make states AI Agents are “available on all plans.”Source: https://www.make.com/en/ai-agents

InfuseOS’s Key Strengths (why we believe it wins)

1) The “no builder” promise

Make reduces complexity, but it’s still fundamentally an automation builder. InfuseOS is built to remove the workflow design burden for the majority of people who don’t want to configure automation.

2) One shared brain across domains

InfuseOS is positioned as a unified agent that spans inbox, calendar, docs, tasks, and communications, enabling cross-domain judgment calls without stitching separate “mini-bots.”

3) Persistent context that compounds over time

InfuseOS is designed to retain durable context (writing style, people, projects, preferences) so the agent improves over time, not just per scenario.

4) Execution loop with verification

InfuseOS is built around: plan → act → verify → store context → iterate. Verification is where real-world automation either becomes trustworthy or becomes noise.

Which One Should You Choose?

Choose Make AI Agents if you need:

A visual automation builder as your primary interface
A platform your ops team can configure, monitor, and iterate on
Agentic automation layered into a mature workflow orchestration product

Choose InfuseOS if you want:

One command interface for cross-domain execution across your tool stack
A pre-trained Chief of Staff experience rather than a builder-first platform
Persistent context and workflows that compound over time without rebuilding

Final Verdict (Unbiased, but clear)

Make AI Agents is one of the strongest “agentic automation platform” offerings because it combines agentic behavior with a mature visual orchestration environment. For builder-oriented teams, it’s a top-tier option.

But if the question is “what will feel like Siri-for-real-work for the 99% of users who hate configuration,” the answer is not “a better builder.”

It’s a system that does the work across domains from a simple command, remembers context, verifies outcomes, and keeps improving. That’s why we believe InfuseOS is the best in the market for autonomous, cross-domain productivity execution.