BiZZdesign HoriZZon Reviews

I've used the solution for business architecture.

The most valuable feature is that it allows you to work with different methods, using the same tool. You can work with ARki and BCNN as they are connected in BiZZdesign HoriZZon, which is fantastic. Its documentation is also really good. It's easy to read and it's open to the Internet.

BiZZdesign HoriZZon could use some improvement when it comes to the implementation of the tool. Its origin is quite pragmatic. Although it does have the project as a concept, it's not possible to look at it from a project perspective, which is not very practical.

I've used BiZZdesign HoriZZon for many years.

When it comes to stability, I give it a seven out of ten. It's a fairly stable solution but has issues with deployment. The database itself and the synchronization with the database of multiple users are not up to standard. A lot of manual synchronization steps are required from the user. The solution depends on someone to manually update the Central Point in order for it to receive the information. We had about 200 people using BiZZdesign.

Scalability is a bit of a problem for BiZZdesign. There is always a possibility it will failover. I would rate the scalability of the solution an eight out of ten.

We also use ARIS at our company, but BiZZdesign HoriZZon is a lot easier to use and allows you to maximize your knowledge and abilities while using it.

BiZZdesign has a lot of issues with deployment. It is web-based and can get a little complicated. It had to go through multiple streams such as Amazon and Virtual PC, which makes things pretty complex. 

The administration and the licensing part of BiZZdesign are quite easy since it's a smaller company. It is also not very cheap. It costs about $2,000 per year.

BiZZdesign HoriZZon has strong requirements for the technical aspect of things, but it is easy to start working on it if you have knowledge of VPN and UML. It gives you the chance to adapt it to your environment and to implement the things you already know.  Overall, I give it a ten out of ten.

We use it primarily for architecture and capability-based modelling. We plan to use it more as an analysis rather than a modelling tool.

We previously used System Architect and Provision, which did not work for us. Since implementing BiZZdesign HoriZZon, many of our solutions and technical and segment architects have been using it actively. We recently changed how we developed BiZZdesign HoriZZon and have completely moved away from the word-based SAHLD, the high-level architecture design, to a fully automated and dynamic solution intent. The advantage of doing that is if one project finishes, the architecture can pick up from there, and all the architectural artifacts are already available in one place for the next project team to pick up.

The enterprise studio where the modelling happens is valuable and a critical part of the tool for non-architects and business stakeholders. In addition, the HoriZZon, where we share most of our models with the stakeholders, is a feature that businesses appreciate because it makes it a collaboration tool.

We are working with BiZZdesign to improve the interfaces with ServiceNow. There are also other tools where we bring the data application components, and data objects into BiZZdesign HoriZZon, and not all the offices are mastered. The initial design assumed that all of the content would be mastered there. So that's one area of improvement that BiZZdesign HoriZZon is working on.

There could be simpler modelling so that instead of users drawing the diagrams in the tool, they can create a table of contents that can automatically be used to create diagrams. In addition, it will make it simpler for non-architects to create representative models.

We have used this solution since the beginning of 2019, using SaaS from AWS.

I rate the stability a nine out of ten.

There is room for improvement with the scalability, and we have been working with BiZZdesign on that. So I rate the scalability a six out of ten. We have 750 active architects using this solution and developing models and about 5,000 stakeholders. We don't have any place to increase the usage right now, and I don't see a considerable increase in the active architects modelling in the BiZZdesign HoriZZon. However, there may be an increase in the number of stakeholders because only certain business stakeholders currently provide consumer access.

I rate technical support an eight out of ten. They're good at solving problems and have good lines of communication internally, so if the first line of support cannot solve the issue, the second line of support does. If the second line of support cannot resolve the issue, they escalate it to their development or product management team.

I rate the initial setup an eight out of ten, and I rate the features available a five out of ten. When we were implementing the solution, the product itself was being evolved. So the implementation was not that difficult, and it was relatively easy. However, many features you would expect from an enterprise architecture tool were still missing. I think a lot of the missing features are covered now, but a lot of them are still on their roadmap.

BiZZdesign technical support was primarily involved in the setup. There were third parties involved, and the documentation provided by BiZZdesign was helpful. The deployment took about three months, and it was not complicated. A lot of the challenges were post-implementation, and not everything is mastered in BiZZdesign. At the core team, four people from our organization were involved in the deployment comprising three consultants and the account manager from BiZZdesign. In addition, there is a support organization that looks after maintenance.

We are still working with BiZZdesign on some of the issues. So while we are in this transition period, we are still investing in the solution. So calculating ROI metrics is difficult at this point.

I rate the pricing a six out of ten, but I can't share more details about the costs. However, the pricing model could be improved considerably.

I rate this solution a seven out of ten.

One of the main advantages of this solution is that they have representation in the Open Group Forum, which means that any changes in ArchiMate are immediately implemented in BiZZdesign. The other big advantage is its ability to interweave various modeling languages and provide a seamless view between them that allows one to navigate from one language to the other through the integrated links and cross-model relations.

This tool is something of a beast - it takes a long time to learn, and it isn't possible for casual users and most architects. Unless a person spends 500 or 1,000 hours on the tool or does very concentrated sessions using all its functionalities, it's very difficult to master. Improving the capability of architects to use the tool would be a big improvement. In the next release, I'd like to see better integration with other product companies in this space, like CMDB and ServiceNow, and for BiZZdesign to introduce knowledge-sharing sessions to showcase new best practices, what's being promoted, client success stories etc.

I've been using this solution for the last four-and-a-half years.

This is a fairly stable tool in terms of integrity and performance.

BiZZdesign's technical support could be improved. For example, we have given them access to our environment, but when we log tickets, they're taken by their level-one team and only go to the experts with access to our environment once they progress. It would be better if when we're logging a specific problem in our environment, it could go directly to a person with access, which would propel the turnaround time. 

Implementation was fairly complex because of constraints on resources when it comes to architects. Layers get implemented at various speeds, so there are gaps, which creates problems because the core layers are supposed to be addressed in parallel. The documentation is also not up to standard, and we would expect better support material in general.

The pricing model is slightly on the high side and could be more competitive for long-term partnerships.

I've evaluated ARIS (which has an additional capability of process mining on its BPM layer and the Alfabet to handle enterprise architecture), TransUnion (whose Sparx tools are loose in the standards and haven't had good feedback), and Signavio.

If you're thinking of implementing BiZZdesign, take it from a capability perspective. The first and primary element to be covered is the architecture capability the organization wishes to establish. Then have your use cases defined very clearly and factor in a fair bit of time for implementation to give it time to produce results. I'd rate this solution as seven out of ten.

My primary use cases are for consulting on enterprise architecture and support of digital transformation, and I also use BiZZdesign as a tool.

The powerful editing function in teamwork project-based, common or shared modeling, based on a powerful repository and knowledge sharing in a portal are the most valuable features. These are the most important features for me. I can add the integration of individual modeling notations like Archimate plus BPMN and DMN, and so on. We travel from one location to another and the tool allows us to keep track.

The user interface and connectivity could use further improvement. The interface could be more user-friendly and intuitive. There was a big step between version 3 and version 4. I still have to learn how to use a lot of functions in version 4. I'm looking for further adjustment or adaptation to Windows style because for me it's a little difficult to switch the experience between both tools. I guess that the tool is adapting and converting to Windows step by step.

It should be more open to integrating with other existing tools. Although there has been progress in the past.

Some of my clients need a translation of the menu into Eastern and Central Europe languages, but EA professionals are able to work in English, so it's not critical.

It is stable although there have been a few cases where it shut down. But the instances were a lot less than Windows itself. 

Scalability is up to my needs because I model just a few thousands of objects and it's powerful and scalable enough. Hopefully, it will continue like this for bigger clients also.

Only one technician is maintaining the solution itself and one enterprise architect on the client side. It only requires a small team for maintenance. 

I would rate their technical support a four out of five. It's sufficient because when I need something explained or to know, for example, how to do imports, the service desk really carefully solved my needs. Also published user/solution documentation is in the current version very comprehensive, I am satisfied.

Before this solution, I would make a model in Visio, PowerPoint and such, not enterprise architecture management tools.

The first time I set it up years ago, it was really difficult for me to customize it because I am more of a business guy than a technician. Now it's much easier because of the metamodel editor that this solution now has so now it's much easier. 

Deployment takes about a few days or weeks. It's easy to use and adapt it, but it's a little bit difficult to negotiate with the client in terms of what to implement, what to be modeled, what kind of methodological backgrounds will be used. 

It's important to plan and think in advance, to be prepared in terms of what to model, for what purpose and for whom, and to prepare an internal enterprise architecture framework. Then only afterward implement it into a tool because the tool will guide you. But if you don't know what you want it's really open and customizable, but will not guide you. It's really important to work a few days or weeks on your framework and then easily implement it in the tool. 

The other advice I would give is from the beginning be in touch with C level management as a sponsor of enterprise architecture and use the reporting possibilities of the tool to satisfy them with insight into the architecture.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten because it's really powerful and I still haven't been able to take advantage of all if its many features. 

This is very good software and very useful. As long as you are intending to do design at a business process level, at application processes levels, or even at data op level.

When you go down to modernizing the architecture of your infrastructure, which is part of my job, it's not at all made for that. They have only covered the eye level part of architecture design in IT, but they have not provided the capabilities to properly do what an organization is designing to do in the future.

It's a good tool. My colleagues that are making use of it for application, business processes, or data modeling, are very satisfied with it. They find it easy to use. The graphical representation is simple but therefore efficient, so I know that they are planning a very good commencement on the use of these tools.

It lacks capabilities with regard to infrastructure modeling.

I have been using BiZZdesign for around two years. 

It's a cloud-based solution but I have not noticed any issue connecting to it, or any problems while using it, and my colleagues have not reported having any kind of issue with it, so I would say that it is pretty stable.

We have five users using this solution. 

It is used on a daily basis.

I haven't needed to contact customer support. 

My advice to someone considering this solution is to follow the training. It's nice to use when you know how to use it. At first, it's good to have some explanations on how it is working. And this information is very important in order to set up your BiZZdesign environments, your libraries, typically, from an architecture standpoint, to make sure that you use it efficiently.

I know that this has been a problem at setup time, so it's not a software installation problem. It is a problem with customization. It's important to have a proper understanding of how BiZZdesign works if you want to make the right first configuration.

In the next release, I would like to see the modernization of the software.

I would rate BiZZdesign an eight out of ten. 

We use this solution to publish our customers' enterprise models.

I find the publishing on the web feature to be the most valuable. The interface is intuitive enough as well.

The users of BiZZdesign should be able to enter their data or make modeling changes via HoriZZon.

I've been working with BiZZdesign HoriZZon since 2018.

It is stable, and I would rate the stability at eight out of ten.

BiZZdesign HoriZZon is scalable, and I'd give it an eight out of ten for scalability. Our customers are enterprise level companies, but the solution is suitable for small and mid-sized companies as well.

My experience with technical support has been good.

We used Software AG previously and switched to BiZZdesign because it is more scalable.

HoriZZon is a cloud platform, and we need to install it for our customers due to certain regulations. Thus, an easier implementation process would definitely help. If it is on-premises, it usually takes at least two days. Two dedicated staff can handle the implementation.

The price is reasonable.

My advice would be to scale your organization and project well, and BiZZdesign will fit your requirements.

Overall, I would rate this solution at eight out of ten.

BiZZdesign Architect makes separates model from views and has a quite extensive set of analytical stuff built in to be very useful in complex environments. Typically enterprise architecture management and strategic portfolio planning can be supported with these tools as the architecture capability matures.

Next to a useful tool for strategic planning it is really helpful in a less mature environment as well. I used the software to easily import catalogs with applications, interfaces, contracts, and many other artifacts to start the modeling of my scope of concern pretty fast and come to compelling results for a plateau planning and roadmap.

It is only available for Windows right now and it really is an outdated interface and framework that is being used. As a Mac worker I really hate that and therefore any other product with less features would be considered a really good alternative.

I find the licensing model not fitting the market.

10 years

Nope. No issues with deployment. Easy installer. It just works.

Yes, it can crash. Save your work frequently!

Nope, no issues and no need.

Good - 8

Good - 8

I used Archi at first but this is only for creating views and not for maintaining a model, which in the core is the real architectural work.

Straight forward. You have to tune to get the best practice results out of the tool. A course is highly recommended.

in-house.

n/a

You need good tools. Just choose one and be good at it!

Yes but not to much. I was certified in the tool, archimate and togaf at Bizzdesign headquarters so it is mainly because of that, that I use this product.

Choose wisely. I did not take the time to investigate on other tools until now. I am willing to let Bizzdesign Architect go for a good Mac solution that also has a separation in model, views and analytics.

Our primary use for this solution was architecture modeling and ArchiMate. We have now switched and are no longer using this solution.

It was deployed on-premises.

We had a lot of problems with BiZZdesign, and I was happy when we switched to another tool. At first, we used the file server for sharing models, which didn't work because it freezes BiZZdesign. We switched to a database while still in a pilot project. Even then, we found that a lot of the functions were grayed out and unavailable for unknown reasons.

We tested it, and we had support from BiZZdesign, including patches, but it just didn't do what we wanted. It was too frustrating. I know that in the meantime there has been a new version and that they have improved, but I never gave it a try because it was too frustrating.

The user interface is in particular need of improvement. Every supplier of these tools knows how to make systems to let users model architecture, maintain relationships, and stuff like that. But, the user experience is of the main importance. You want to model quickly, and usually, you want to model in a team and to collaborate on the same model, and this is where I think BiZZdesign could improve.

Technical support for this solution can be improved.

This solution would benefit from the inclusion of support for different models, beyond ArchiMate-based and architectural, for other kinds of users. This might include strategy or business-wise modeling. 

The version that I have seen is not stable.

The version that I have seen is not scalable. That is when the problems arose.

We contacted technical support when we had our problems. The tried helping us, but I'm not saying that I was satisfied. On a scale from one to ten, I would rate them a five, or six, max.

The initial setup of this solution was very straightforward.

The deployment took perhaps half an hour when we were installing locally, and then using a file server. When we switched to a database, we needed the organizational procedures. So, this takes a little longer. Overall, it is not a problem for BiZZdesign.

We deployed this solution ourselves.

We did evaluate other options before choosing BiZZdesign, although I am not sure why we selected this option.

We have now moved to a new solution that works. The most important things are stability, collaboration, and of course, the user experience. Stability is a very important part of the user experience.

I do not recommend using BiZZdesign. It is too much of a niche solution. Solutions like Enterprise Architect, or Visual Paradigm, are much more usable for the different kinds of audiences and users. For example, with Visual Paradigm, you can also model business processes and UML models.

I would rate this solution a one out of ten.