Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect Reviews

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.

The document generation tool. The ability to define templates based on our corporate documentation standards and automatically generate documents at a click of a button is such a productivity booster.

I don't know where to start. I've used Sparx at one organization and was subsequently primarily involved in the adoption and implementation of EA at another organization.

We transformed the tooling from a mis-mash of Gliffy diagrams, web-sequence diagrams, and some Aris for capturing requirements. We have implemented standardized EA models aided by templates. It increased the productivity due to ease of use. It provided a uniform tool from requirements analysis to technical design specifications used across teams. We have more complete models that are published and accessible, they reflect changes in real time. Links across components aids in impact assessment.

Repository integration. SVN based repositories can be a pain to merge changes. The database based repository can become slow.

I've used it for approximately eight years, but only about three years extensive use.

We have had no issues with the deployment.

We created a database repository. Adding users and growing the model did add a fair amount of latency.

We have had no issues scaling it/

I've not had to use customer service.

I've not had to use tech support. The online help, forums and tutorials were sufficient to solve the problems that I encountered.

I have evaluated various tools - IBM Rational Software Architect, briefly played with SyBase Power Designer and Archi. I found them difficult to use, a steeper learning curve, or they did only a portion of the modelling.

UML modelling, XML generation import/export, design patterns, automated generation of documentation, XMI import/export. Benefits to the business accrue from adoption of model-driven architecture principles and practices. The tool and its features make application of these principles productive, efficient and shared by the architects community, thus helping achieve the benefits in practice

Shared models capture digitally fundamental knowledge about the business and its representation in ICT systems. Tooling makes this knowledge shareable, reusable, validated, rigorous, open and  turns it into a common asset of the Company rather than an arcane informal insight of a few individuals. Helps communicate with vendors and quickly bring new hires or new project members up to speed on projects

In truth we are still using an older version of the product, and we are aware of a number of improvements that have been made to it since. We feel that compatibility with other MDA modelling products, particularly open source such as Visual Paradigm, Modelio or Capella is an area of improvement, as well as better integration with Integrated Development Environments. We would benefit from better support of REST web services and JSON. However we would not encourage ‘bundling’ Enterprise Architecture with IDEs: we prefer Sparx Systems to specialize in building the best modelling tool and features, but allowing a wide choice of IDES. The fundamental reason for this is that we cannot and do not wish to enforce the use of a single tool on all our partners: we want to be able to use a single model, not a single tool

We've been using it since 2010/11.

We've had no issues with the deployment.

We've had no stability issues.

We've been able to scale it to our needs without issue.

We have had very little, or no, need for customer service, which we count as excellent digital customer service level is delivered through the online tools and the forum.

It was in fact straightforward, which was one of the determinants for selecting it.

Implementation and training was done in house under control of an experienced MDA practictioner. We did in fact train our partners.

Depending of what items enter in the computation of ‘return’ the ROI can be estimated from high to very high, productivity gains measured in either shorter lifecycles or headcounts of personnel required to build effective models.

We have evaluated other products both before and after the adoption of Enterprise Architect. We selected EI as the best quality/price to ease of learning and use. 

The tool is not a substitute for brains; it boosts the productivity of your thinking process, resulting in the very fast production of good models, but of bad ones just as easily, except that a good thinker can sport bad designs early before they become implemented disasters.

Creating a repository than everyone can work on for an entire enterprise and then creating a custom fit set of concepts, tools and process.

It provides a centralized, self-regulating (like a spreadsheet is self regulating) standardized repository of architectural artifacts which can take in or spit out a custom selected subset of these artifacts in a wide variety of forms including diagrams, spreadsheets, MS Word documents, tables, xml, JSON, etc. By allowing extreme customizability, it has drastically reduced learning and ramp up time for new uses.

Automated reporting saves me a kazillion hours a week of cutting, pasting and editing.

Profiles and Stereotypes allows me to reduce the learning curve for newbies by 95%

The automated charts and graphs hold great appeal for business types and its ability to connect with so many other tools (DevOPs, Jira, etc) make it a great enterprise level hub.

Their business model does not include consulting services but this can be a strength in some cases.

Companies that include or even highlight the consulting arm of their companies can easily create a situation in which the on site staff become dependent on the vendor consultants and are unable to progress without them.

Knowing which button to select or which icon to click on is one thing but understanding how a tools like this fits in to the overall methodology takes an in company investment in integrating the tools and software process.

I've worked for most of the big name vendors and I know first hand that the only real way to learn is to roll up your sleeves and start using the tool on a regular basis.

Training and instruction are very available for Sparx via webinars, videos, pdfs, whitepapers and email support which I have always found to be first rate.

In addition to the huge number of manuals, videos, webinars and forums available, just googling a Sparx issues is likely to provide with a huge number of hits to find just what you are looking for.

It's huge user base (750 K) is a big advantage.

Yes one must invest a little time in learning how to use the tool.  Using the cup o soup paradigm, "just add hot water" will not work. If you want that , stick with Visio,

12 years

Perfect - never had any problems.

Perfect - never had any problems.

Though only available by e-mail they really know their stuff and respond very quickly.

Visio - it's like comparing crayons and paper to a spreadsheet.

BizzDesign - a very polished tool but much less flexible and customizable than Sparx EA. Also much more expensive.

No - install, run and if you want a repository run a db script.

YOu need to know how to run a database script.

In house ( myself)

I can conservatively estimate that expert users double their production and novice users gain 10% The more you use it for the more savings you will see.

The savings in license fees more than allows you to invest in a little training but get someone good.

The biggest challenge you will have with Sparx EA ( or any other modelling tool) is fully leveraging all the features it has to offer.

Too often, companies don't invest a little time in training  and it ends up being used as a drawing tool which is like using a smartphone only as a calculator.

Yes, but for the combination of price and value, no one beats them. Now if you want to pay a million dollars there's a lot to choose from.

While I've often heard the large million dollar tools tout how much more powerful they are I have yet to see anything they offer that Sparx EA doesn't.

Watch out for fraudulent consultants who spout jargon but know nothing about modeling. Make someone show you the real stuff they have done.

Look for someone who can explain modern modeling techniques and concepts in a very understandable and intuitive way. If someone spouts too much jargon, watch out.

I am in a new company, and we are beginning the process of modeling the architecture. We're using Enterprise Architect for that.

The TOGAF ADM model is most valuable. It is also very cheap as compared to other options in the market.

Its usability needs to be improved. For non-technical users, it is a little difficult to understand how Enterprise Architect works. Users who are not engineers find it difficult to understand how this tool works. This is something they need to work on.

They can develop a BPM model to simulate processes.

I have been using this solution for three years.

It is quite stable.

It is a fixed license, so we don't have the functionality of scaling it. We have five people who are using this solution. They all are in the strategy area of the company.

I didn't experience any issues so far, so I didn't ask for help.

I have used MEGA HOPEX in my earlier company, but it is very complex to understand and costly.

It is straightforward.

We are implementing it on our own.

It is cheaper than other solutions. Its cost is around $686 per year. There are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees.

To implement this solution, you need experienced people who know about enterprise architecture.

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

I'm primarily using the solution for architecture design.

There are a lot of features in Enterprise Architect. It allows us to take on a lot of tasks.

The product has an easy initial setup.

The product is fairly stable.

Many items are not actually handy, I would say. Many things which should be working - regarding some techniques - are not working and seem to be buggy. Recently, I was trying to perform a task and I was thinking about getting in touch with Sparx about it. However, I started with confirming my concerns with colleagues, and now I would like to somehow report it to Sparx and ask them if the way the task is being handled a bug or feature.

For example, there seems to be inheritance between blocks. I know inheritance from programming, and I checked that this mechanism is still working in MagicDrawer. However, it's not working in Enterprise Architect almost at all. Some things which should be inherited are not inherited, or if they are inherited after, let's say, deleting the inheritance dependency that still remains in the target block. It is not logical, at least for a programmer. 

The solution needs to offer better support for the mobile-based system. Right now, it's not working.

I haven't been using the solution for very long just yet. It's only been about four months or so since I first began working with the product.

The solution is rather stable. I've only had two times crashes in the several weeks. Typically, I don't have too many issues with it. There are some bugs every once in a while, however.

I can't really speak to the scalability of the solution. It's not something that I've actually attempted. It may be scalable, however, without actually trying, I can't say.

The solution is widely used in our organization. We're very likely to continue using it, however, I can't say that with 100% certainty.

I haven't yet contacted technical support. I have questions for them, and I will likely in the future, however, I haven't yet and therefore can't speak to the responsiveness or level of knowledge they have.

I'm currently considering using MagicDraw.

The initial setup was not complex. It was a pretty straightforward task. 

The deployment was quick and we had it up and running in 50 minutes or so.

We handled the implementation in-house. We didn't need the assistance of an integrator or consultant.

I don't have any insights into the costs of the product. I don't know if it is expensive or reasonably priced.

I'm a customer.

The product is a standalone application on my site. It's licensed from the cloud.

I'm not sure if I would recommend the product. This tool has so many features. It depends on what a person needs to use. Generally, I've experienced some limitations from all the solutions that I've found - including this one. It's too complicated of a software solution to definitively recommend.

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

The product is good. When I'm trying to do something specific for a part of project documentation, it's hard to get it figured out if you don't use it all the time. It's such a massive tool, it's hard to figure out how to dig in and get to the documentation where you have to be to get some idea of what to do. There are not a lot of examples that I'm aware of to be able to do that.

The user interface is going to be difficult because of all the things we have to do when we're doing design and trying to figure out use cases and stuff like that. Tutorials would really help out where you could just start to pick it up and say, "Okay, for this kind of thing, I'm going to go through this tutorial step by step and get it completed." They don't have that. There's nothing wrong with the tool. It's how to use it.

I have lightly been using Sparx for the last five years. 

There are always peculiarities in any large package like this. I didn't see anything that was really a showstopper. We've come to accept a lot of things that's just the way it is and go on, but there wasn't anything that really was a problem.

Scalability is not a problem. You can always increase the footprint of what the thing can do because it's so powerful.

I maintain Sparx in my company. I'm a designer and I'm an architect. I get to do everything. So consequently my time is picked at. It's not like I can specialize in just doing architecture.

I do plan on increasing the usage of it. We don't use it every day. If I've got a finite state machine and I'm trying to figure out how to document it, then I'll go ahead and log into this and try to figure out what I have to do to document a state machine and apply it to what I'm doing.

That kind of thing is always difficult. It's not just coming up with C++ classes and just a bunch of UML, but there are things that you have to have both the graphical presentation and the words pulled together to figure out what the heck is going on in this design.

I didn't have any problem with the initial setup. It took over an hour to set up. It doesn't take long on the install. It's longer to configure it for the part of the project you want to use it for. It's got such a massive footprint as far as what you could use it for in a project, but if you're a one or two-man shop, you're just going reach and get it. It's got to be done real quick and it's difficult to do that because it's such a massive tool.

Visual Paradigm is the first one I had about five years ago, I added Enterprise Architect. Enterprise Architect gives a good overview of the tool, but I find that it's difficult for me to take that example and apply it to what I'm trying to accomplish in documenting a design.

The advice that I would give is that you should be willing and able to spend a lot of time outside regular working hours to get to know the tool because it's difficult to just pick it up and if you've got no mentors or tutorials that are so specific as to cover what you're trying to do, you have to dig it out. It's difficult.

I would rate it a nine out of ten.

I use the solution primarily to get some design done and to have some guidance and documentation.

The product overall is quite good.

The initial setup is easy.

The solution is quite robust.

The solution is difficult to learn.

The documentation needs a bit of improvement. What I find is that when I'm trying to do something specific for some part of a project, in terms of documentation, it's kind of hard to get at figuring out if you don't use it all the time. 

It's hard, because it's such a massive tool, to figure out how to dig in and to get to the place you need to go. The documentation would give you some idea of what to do. There's just not a lot of examples that are fully baked that I'm aware of.

The user interface is difficult, however, it was going to be difficult anyway, because of all the things we have to do when we're doing design and trying to figure out use cases and stuff like that. What I'm getting at is more tutorials are needed. You should be able to just to pick it up and say, okay, for this kind of thing, I'm going to go through this tutorial step by step and get it completed. And I don't see that as an option for getting to know the solution.

I've been using the solution for five years.

There are always peculiarities in any large package like this. I didn't see anything that sent anything off the rails. We've come to accept a lot of things. That's just the way it is.  We go on, but there has never been anything that's really been a big problem.

Scalability is not a problem at all. You can always increase the footprint of what the thing can do due to the fact that it's so powerful.

I do plan on increasing the usage of it. If I've got a finite state machine and I'm trying to figure out "how do I document this thing", then I'll go headlong into this solution and try to figure out what I have to do to document everything and apply it to what I'm doing. 

The specific design use cases can be difficult. It's not just coming up with C++ classes and stuff like that. It's just a bunch of UML, but there are things that you have to have both the graphical presentation and the words fold together to figure out what the heck is going on in this design. That's why I'll probably continue to use it, and expand my usage of it.

In the past, I've used Enterprise Architecture. It gives you a good overview of the tool, however, I found it was difficult for me to take that example and apply it to what I'm trying to accomplish in documenting the design.

I didn't have any problem with the original setup at all. I wouldn't say it is complex. It's pretty straightforward.

Deployment takes probably over an hour due to the fact that, once you get it installed, it takes a while to configure it for the part of the project you want to use it for. It's got such a massive footprint as far as what you could use it for in a project, that if you're a one or two-man shop, it takes a while. With such a massive tool, there's just a lot of man-hours to get everything as you need it.

We don't really have the bandwidth to have a specific person to maintain the solution; we do that ourselves.

I just have a one-seat license manager. I'm not sure what the pricing is on it.

We're just a customer. We don't have a business relationship with Sparx.

The solution is deployed through the application installed on a Windows 10 machine and I do everything on the machine, not on the Cloud. I stay away from the Cloud. We're not that big, basically a two-man shop. 

The advice that I would give other users is that you better be willing and able to spend a lot of time outside of regular working hours to get to know the tool because it's difficult to just pick it up. If you've got no mentors, or if you've got no tutorials that are so specific as to cover what you're trying to do, you have to dig it out. It's difficult.

That said, the solution is as good as they come. 

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. If it offered more tutorials, I might give it full marks. At the end of the day, the solution is only as good as the person using it.