Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect Reviews

We use this solution for our enterprise architecture and all forms of data modeling using UML.

Within our company, there are roughly 25 employees using this solution. 

We use this solution a lot. In fact, we plan on using it to cover all of our enterprise architecture-related tasks.

This solution provides us with good integration between different notations. It also features good reporting facilities coupled with a concrete database.

This solution is quite complex to use. It would be nice if the learning curve wasn't so steep. 

I can't think of any additional features that I would like to see in the next release. There are already plenty; if there were any more, it would only become harder to use. 

I have been using Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect for the past 10 years. 

This solution is quite stable. 

I haven't had to contact technical support. 

The initial setup isn't easy, but it's not hard either — it's in between. 

I think our license costs roughly $1,000 a year, but I could be wrong. 

I would recommend this solution to others. Just make sure to hire an expert to get you started. 

Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of eight. 

The primary use case is product architecture.

This is a great tool for creating models with a very flexible data model behind the diagrams, making updates simple.

The most valuable feature is the integrated data model, so if I change the name of an item, all models using that object are automatically updated.

This solution should have better ease of use for the uninitiated.

I have been using this solution for more than ten years, on and off.

Initially, I used the temporary license for capturing some initial requirements on a new project restricting my use to the Desktop Edition. This worked very well and was intuitively easy to use and produced some nice reports.

We have a long way to go on the new project and we are resource limited. The learning curve might be substantial for what I'm up against. I'm point lead on integrating and using this tool in the new project and supporting the other team members plus our management lead.

I've read about the product a lot, but very little experience outside of requirements capture.

We've had no issues with deployment.

We've had no issues with stability.

We've had no issues with scalability.

After reading about the differences in the Editions, I determined that we really need the Systems Engineering Edition to handle project versions and use UML for more than just software, plus auditing, and requirements tracing, etc.

We are adding more requirements to the project as time goes by. I've added a number of Use Cases, but this is not mature enough to do any project estimation (Yet). I have added some packages that support project life cycle and project roadmap. I'm going to next add tasks related to implementation of the requirements as an initial way of getting the PM side of things with a Gantt chart that makes sense. The tutorials are a little thin for doing this, and I could find no examples that were provided for ideas. There is just so little documentation on the PM side of things, but Sparx could address that deficiency by providing various scenarios along with examples just a thought.  Also, that company is using old servers that are about to be replaced mid-summer, so I cannot use their equipment to setup a database backed project. However, I have installed MySQL on my local machine and have set it up for use with the project I'm working on for them. I've been thinking about using Amazon AWS to setup a cloud based solution for them, but don't have the time for this right now.

I use it to demonstrate Business Process Modeling Notation (BPMN) and architecture repository. I also demonstrate the document generation facility of the tool. It has got a plugin named BRC, binary enterprise architecture system integration, and I use that to show to my participants' diagram-driven architecture, gap analysis using diagrams, work package creations, and architecture roadmap creation. 

It is a desktop solution. I have purchased the desktop version.

I like it because it is very economical. Price-wise, Sparx EA is very low cost. 

It is easy to use. Connecting entities is very easy in this.

It is an EA tool that is approved by Open Group. It is in the tool register of Open Group. 

Their technical support is not good in India. I wrote to them because I had a question, but I never got an answer. So, I just left it behind.

I've been using this solution for the last three years for my class.

It is stable.

I have not used it for large projects, but I have asked Sparx people whether it can have multi-faring and configuration management, and they said yes. 

I am the main trainer of my organization, and I am the only one who is using it.

Their technical support is not good in India. It could be better. I wrote an email to the support, but I didn't get a response. I did not call them and pursue it too much because my need was not professional. My need was more education-based. It is good for my use, and I'm able to fill the time in my class with topics. 

It is easy to install. You just execute an MSF file, and it is implemented quickly. It took a maximum of three minutes.

I did it myself. I did not take the help of any technical team of Sparx EA.

It is very economical and low cost. You have to pay for a one-time license, and it is active forever.

I would recommend this solution. I would rate it a six out of 10.

I work for a big government organization, and I am an advisor. I provide advice about the standard IT solutions, BI solutions, and integration solutions. I advise about the standards that we have. We are trying to make everything as standardized as possible for the whole organization. While advising, I think about whether a solution is good enough and meets the standards. I also consider if we have to do some upgrades or if we need to change the solution. I only give advice. I am not the one making decisions. 

Modeling is a part of my work, and it has a lot of standard modeling languages. It is quite wide, and a lot is possible in it. We are not programming it ourselves, but if you are into programming and developing software yourself, you can go further and do a lot with Sparx. You can work from the framework and go into the details.

With this solution, you get a lot of value at a low cost. It is also quite intuitive in terms of use. I like the use of it. 

The fact that you can do a lot yourself is a plus point, but it also becomes a challenge because you need an understanding of the programming languages to get things to work. It becomes challenging for those who are not very good at programming. You have standard reports, but if you want to make your own reports, you have to program it. Similarly, if you want validations rules, you have to take care of them yourself. 

I have been using this solution for about five years.

It is stable.

We don't have a lot of users because we are not developing the software ourselves. We just use a few models of the software.

We have our own functional maintenance. We also have an external company for technical support. They get in touch with Sparx's technical support if needed, but I don't have an idea about if they need support. 

Its price is very good for the value that you get with it.

It can do so many things. Because of this, sometimes, it can be a bit difficult to find what you need, which is logical and expected in every tool with a lot of features. It is kind of a project in itself to learn to work with it. It is quite easy when you work with it for some time.

It is a very good solution. Before you start, I would recommend considering the following:

• How will you use it?
• Do you need a central database or does everything work separately?
• Do you need a lot of exports and imports for other things? 

There could be challenges in terms of the integrations of the models and when there are a lot of people working on it. You need to think about who is given what rights, and you shouldn't let everyone work on everything because it could become a mess. You need to think carefully about how to organize your work before you start working with it. 

I would rate Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect an eight out of ten.

I primarily use this product for teaching at the University in Bali. I use it to teach project modeling, sometimes it is used to illustrate code, reverse engineering, code generation, and nowadays systems modeling. Some simulation, as well, but it's not really mainstream.

I know that this solution is also good for business modeling. However, I do not do that as much because I am involved in embedded systems, and these days people talk a lot about IoT. 

The company uses this for their own modeling, and perhaps for their processes, as well. Prior to using this application, people were creating PowerPoint slides with any flow that they wanted. This solution looks for consistency and performs checks on the model. In this way, the quality of the documentation has improved.

I like that there is support for software patterns. The reverse engineering part is a feature that I like. Not so much the code generation, but the reverse engineering and also that it can be extended.

You can extend Enterprise Architect by using JavaScript to extend the tools. I like the ability to make metamodels and some kind of domain-specific language.

There is something called Agent-Oriented Modeling and a student for which I was a silent supervisor created an extension for this in his Master's thesis. He was able to extend the tools by scripting.

The platform has support for Windows and Mac, but not Linux. It would be nice to have it supported on the Linux operating system.

The product is quite heavyweight, but if you want to do many things with it, it's like a Swiss Army Knife.

If they move in the direction of a cloud-based version then I think it is a good idea because people do not want to install so much software. I have seen it with several IDEs, where it is easier to use cloud versions instead of keeping local versions up to date.

I think that stability is very good. I had models made in one version, and when I updated, it still worked. I didn't have to do any hacking in order for the new version to process the models made in an earlier version. 

I was using this product for teaching, without a real team effort, so with respect to the scalability, it is hard for me to tell. It seemed ready, but I don't know how many people could work together on it. I don't think that it is realistic to say that you want one hundred people to work on the same model. If it is that big then you should chop it up into smaller pieces.

When I contacted them they usually answered within a day, so it's quite good.

I think that they have support elsewhere, but it seems to me that my answers were coming from Australia. It was quite convenient because I would send something in the afternoon, and by the time I woke up the next day, they had already been working on it.

Overall, I was very happy with the technical support.

It starts just like everything but before people become productive they have to do several things. I performed the setup in a virtual environment and there was no problem with it. Sometimes, license key management is a pain, but I think that is the case with many products. Especially with these so-called "floating key management" systems. 

My advice for anybody who is implementing this solution is to take advantage of the good webinars that they have. Go through the example tutorials because they have a lot of them, before embarking on your own.

I don't know how their courses are because I did not feel the need to use them. However, because I have used a lot of UML and modeling tools, I may not be the typical user.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

It is the perfect tool.

We can easily use it with our new customers.

Its most valuable feature is the Zachman Framework.

The reporting needs improvement.

• Available architecture frameworks
• Ability to generate documentation
• Forward and reverse engineering capabilities
• Extensibility

• Documented operational processes of all business departments using Archimate 2.0 framework
• Able to depict bottleneck areas - risky processes, infrastructure deficiencies, and opportunities to reuse strategic content
• Visualization of the business was a major benefit

• Ease of customization to develop internal frameworks
• Custom templates and diagrams

I've used it over six years.

Multi-user, enterprise model sharing requires some IT help but overall the experience is pretty straight forward and positive.

No, it's a stable and mature product with good online and community support.

Running large and complex models (ours contained thousands of objects) does require a powerful machine with 8+GB of RAM.

I did not need to use the actual customer service as there are a few books published by EA experts, and community answers are available as well.

9/10, as most of the technical issues are quickly resolved.

We switched from Rational Rose due to the extreme affordability of Sparx Enterprise Architect for the capabilities and quality of the solution.

It's very easy and straight forward to setup, and so are the updates.

It was all done in-house.

It's extremely high.

The original setup was about half an hour of my time, and updates are in the 10 minute range. The network repository took a day to establish, configure and start using. Daily costs are negligible.

• Rational Rose
• Eclipse Modeling
• CA Erwin

Buy Peter Doomen's book "Fifty Enterprise Architect Tricks" book, join the Sparx and LinkedIn communities of experts.