Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect Reviews

We use it for data modeling, business process modeling, and all kinds of enterprise architecture tasks such as DoDAF, ArchiMate, SysML, and UML. We do a lot of data modeling, model transformation, and GIS modeling with it. 

We are using its latest version.

There are a couple of things. Price is one thing, but we also like the scriptability of it. We got into scripting it and automating tasks with it, and it is super duper easy to do and helpful. The API has improved over the years. We automate everything, and I love the automation aspects of it.

Its documentation is not 100% perfect, but it is good enough. It is powerful, but because it is so powerful, it is sort of arcane.

It took me a while to figure out how to use the report generation features effectively. So, it would be really nice if they had a way to make that a little bit more interactive and a little bit more straightforward.

Something that is a little bit annoying is that the changes that you make to models are instant and permanent. So, you have to be careful with what you do, and you should do a backup or have some kind of a version control scheme in there. I'm used to Word where you can hit Control+Z and undo what you just did. It is not quite that way in Enterprise Architect. There are cases where the model changes, so you got to be careful with what you do before you change the model.

I set up our Pro Cloud Server literally last week. I've used EA for 10 years or more.

I don't think I've ever had it crash before.

They're amazing. They're a great company. All my interactions with them have been outstanding. So, they're good.

I've used a few other tools such as public domain RG and System Architect. EA is a good, cheap, flexible, and capable tool.

EA is extremely easy to set up and use once you know what you're doing. You really do need to have some kind of an overview from someone to get it started. They have good online tutorials, so you can get going. It is pretty easy to get going.

It is cheap.

I am about to do testing of interoperability between EA, System Architect, and a few other things. I'll be really interested to see how the ins and outs of sharing artifacts between those two capabilities work.

I would advise others who are looking into implementing EA to get training. I learned it the hard way. I'm hardheaded, and I just went at it myself, but getting training is going to be a helpful thing on what to do and how to do it correctly. I would learn how to do what you're trying to do before buying a tool to do it. Data modeling is not just about the tool, it is about the actual data modeling itself. So, if you're going to do enterprise architecture, you have to take enterprise architecture training from The FEAC Institute or another institute. Instead of just going right in and using the tool, it is better to be trained. I train my people in what they're doing and not just the tool. They do it way better when I give them the tool.

I would rate Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect an eight out of 10. We do a lot of things with it, and it is a great tool, but no one is a 10.

The RTF document generator and profiles.

The RTF document generator allows me to focus more of my time on architecture and less on word processing. I can produce up-to-date reports anytime at the push of a button and that is a (huge!) time saver.

The profiles allow me to customize the tool to the corporate environment instead of the other way around saving huge amounts of time and energy on trying to turn dozens of individuals into TOGAF, ArchiMate or Zachman experts, or even Sparx EA experts.

Various groups within the enterprise can now have access to a centralized and standardized repository.

Truth be told, like most products of its kind, it is not always an intuitively easy tool to use. In fairness, it is very hard to enable a non-expert user to do complex things in a totally easy intuitive way and I don’t know any tool that is intuitive.

If you just want to create some diagrams with shapes and arrows, then use Visio.

But if you want to create a well-structured, multi-layered, traceable model that can auto generate all kinds of documents, then you will need some expertise in both architecture and the tool.

I've used this solution for six years.

No.

No, and I’ve worked on repositories with well over a hundred users.

Excellent, not only do I get quick responses, but their people are well-equipped to handle complex and leading edge issues and questions.

I have used other tools (DOORS, Rational, etc.), but always found them more limited, clunky, and expensive.

Very straightforward.

It’s the best deal in town, by far.

I’m always keeping my eye on the tool landscape and there are a lot of good tools out there. But for the money, breadth of scope, depth of features, add-ons, customizability, and capabilities, it still ranks number one.

Carefully evaluate any tool before you buy it, as their product sheets and PowerPoints always look good.

Even more important, beg, borrow, or steal one person who is really an SME with the tool, but be careful, if you don’t have an SME how can you evaluate candidates? My advice, don’t rely on a big consulting firm as many of them hype up their “experts”. Hire your own rock star on staff/contract and if he doesn’t measure up, hire a new one.

Also, and this goes for any tool, don’t count on the tool to be a substitute for qualified modeling expertise. Think of it as MS Word in a legal firm. It can help you with formatting, spell checking and all kinds of other things to help create, organize, edit, modify and manage your information but if you know nothing about the law or writing legal contracts, MS Word isn’t going to provide you with that expertise.

Have good people lead the use of the tool.

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.

• Open API, published database schema
• Report generation: Makes the tool easy to configure and easy to extract analytics/reports
• A large community with many examples and modeling standards supported, including UML, BPMN, and ArchiMate

I have used the BPMN modelling, reporting, and analytic capability with a number of clients to document their business processes. These have been used for staff training, change management, and regulatory reporting.

The tool lacks an interactive web interface. The HTML generated is static. Users can’t add comments, run reports, or query the generated HTML via a web browser. To do this with the out-of-the-box capability, users need to install the Sparx Windows client.

However, you can configure the generated HTML to invoke web services that you can code using the open API. The open API provides reporting and querying via a web browser. This is something that I have done for clients.

(Update on above comments: Sparx has just released an interactive web interface - see their site for

I have used it for 14 years.

There were no stability issues. The product uses a client-server model, so any issues would be due to the RDBMS that you deploy.

There were scalability issues. The HTML generation with very large models, over 4000 diagrams, can be problematic. It will take several hours to generate.

Sparx Systems provides tools and web/email-based support for licensed users. They are responsive, with queries typically answered within 24 hours.

They rely on a global network of third-party partners who provide local professional services. I can provide this in the UK. There is also a very active community that can answer most of your questions.

Technical support is good, with the limitations mentioned regarding customer service.

I’ve used many solutions over the years. I tend to come back to Sparx because it is the best value for the money.

The initial setup is simple. There are some advanced options related to source control and WAN optimization/cloud service (HTTP connectivity; not Sparx in the cloud).

However, the most complex consideration when setting Sparx up is how to structure the model to address your business requirements. This is key because the tool has no out-of-the-box model structure. You need to define it.

Sparx does not have a professional services team. They rely on a global network of partners. Medium/large organisations should engage one of these partners or bring in an experienced contractor, such as myself, to help them set up their model.

It has very competitive pricing/licensing. Spend the money you save on experienced support when setting up your model.

I have run tooling RFPs comparing BPM tools such as iGrafx, Aris, ADONIS, and Sparx. (Sparx was already being used by solution architects.)

We chose Sparx as it was the incumbent tool within the organisation. It was significantly less expensive than the other tools.

Get experienced help with the setup/configuration of your model so it can fully meet your business requirements.

The possibility to use a common architect repository with a standard SQL server. Working with Archimate standards on the new open group Archimate Exchange format (XML) that allows us to use Archi for distributed archimate modeling in every important project and import those Archimate model to the common Sparx based repository and building a reference architecture for the whole company.

Now for the first time we have a complete reference architecture repository to build different target architecture for every large program and projects.

Sparx is built by software tech-guys for software tech-guys. Its not an everyday architect or other office-worker mostly loved tool. It has an inconsistent menu structure as some functions are context aware, but it's nearly impossible to remember where to find them next time you are looking for them. It's not like an office tool, but it's not even like some software development tools, just another animal.

We did an overall comparison of several Archimate tools during fall of 2015, and since December 2015 we have been implementing this feature for our architect community. We're also using the Archimate plugin 3.2.1.

We have had no issues with the deployment.

As we were selected floating licenses we was required to install a license server with two license-services, one for Sparx EA and a separate for the BEASI plugin. As those services have different techniques i.e different time-outs, we are having a problem with VPN users losing licenses for the BEASI plugin and that requires a Sparx restart to get back those licenses.

We have had no issues scaling it for our needs.

I have not used Sparx support yet, but I have e-mailed BEASI support a lot and they have got a fairly good response time. It has room for improvement for both installation manuals and tips & tricks for Sparx and especially for BEASI.

Implemented by ourselves with e-mail support from Biner AB who sold us the products.

With at least 10 architect working with this toolset, we should get ROI within first year, as we think we can make better assumptions on large projects and programs architecture footprint on the current real-world environment

As I said about the license services before, this was and still is a major concern about the stability of the product, mostly a BEASI plugin concern,

We were comparing to BizzDesign Architect, Orbus-software and others, but as we still are a rather immature architecture community, we will start small and when we can deliver business benefits we will make a new tool comparison, after a year or so, in 2017. So the main reason for Sparx & BEASI is the low-price and thanks to Beasi a full Archimate support, the inbuilt Archimate support in Sparx is not reaching.

I think the open source tool Archi is better as an Archimate modeling tool but its only a single user tool, whereas Sparx is multi-user tool with its support of a central db-server for a company architecture repository.

The combination of Sparx and BEASI is good if you need multi model features and a 100% Archimate function tool, otherwise I think there are better tools, but of course it's more expensive than other Archimate tools out there.

We are using Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect for model-based system engineering.

I have found the solution is lacking options. The general usability needs improvement and more compliance to CML definitions.

I have been using Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect for approximately two years.

The stability could improve.

The scalability could improve in my experience.

We have hundreds of employees in my company that are using this solution.

The company does not put a lot of focus on technical support. I am not sure if they are overloaded but there is improvement needed.

I was previously using PTC Windchill and we switched to Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect because it was too expensive.

The installation was very easy.

Our IT department did the implementation of the solution.

I would not recommend this solution to others.

I rate Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect a five out of ten.

Our primary use case is related to the architecture around tying the business objectives and values to their maintenance management and asset management system. I'm a digital asset intelligence lead and we are customers of Sparx.  

The company wants to reduce its maintenance budget so the aim is to get more for less. The solution has achieved this and improved efficiency.

Sparx has good functionality to tie back the requirements coming all the way up to the balance score card. The connection is good as well being reusable so you can tweak the system and change different elements in it, which actually cascade down and see the connections with the other elements.

I think the UI could be improved and made a little bit more presentable. I've also found that sometimes finding the track of the information inside can be difficult. All their topics and help are related to each other with one link over the other and it's a bit like going down a rabbit hole and not being able to find your way back. It would be helpful to have some form of infographic showing how these concepts are related to each other. But I also understand that there is a huge amount of information available and sometimes finding the proper tool is not easy.

I've been using the solution for almost a year. 

I rate the solution seven out of 10. 

I am using Sparx for narrow purposes. I am not doing any exports and am mostly designing in the Model pipe in ArchiMate. 

My skills are not widespread.

ArchiMate is a good feature. 

This is a useful tool for IT people who need to design their solution architecture.

There are other features that would be good for Architecture.

The interface is not as fancy as it is in some other software solutions. 

Some of the features may be fine but I prefer a different type of interface.

Sometimes, it's difficult to read the text when you are presenting. The text is not very large or easy to read. It needs a zooming option. 

The user interface could be better, it needs improvement.

This solution has some limitations from a business perspective.

In the next release, I would like to see multi-language support.

I have been using this solution for one year.

We are using version 15. Currently, the latest version is 16.

Technical support is fine. 

I spoke with someone from Australia and they responded and tried to resolve the issues.

They spoke of the features and the plan to resolve the issues but didn't really acknowledge my suggestions on how to improve the user interface and make it better for the users.

Previously with another company, I was using ARIS.

Enterprise Architect is strong for them. UML is a very good solution for its purpose.

They were able to generate the codes. They were presenting me with the ability to transform BPMN to BPAL notations, convert, and then somehow enrich the BPAL notation to create an executable code from that. It's a useful tool for coding.

To my knowledge, we plan to continue the usage of this solution. It is the decision of the company and they have decided to continue using this product for specific purposes.

My recommendation for this product really depends on the purpose. I am more on the business side, and for business purposes, this product has some limitations. 

The user experience and presenting it is challenging. This solution is not fancy, as in other products. However, it is a useful tool for IT people who need to design their solution architecture. 

It depends on the purpose and orientation of the designer. 

If the designer is IT, it's good because I have heard it from many people with an IT background that this is a kind of baseline that they need to use for UML design, and also for details and for architecture, is good.

This is also good for Enterprise Architecture because it has ArchiMate. While there are many good features, there are better ones available in the market.

I have only read about them, so I cannot accurately compare.

It is difficult to rate this product, as everything has a purpose. If for example, I was in IT, I would rate it a nine out of ten, but from the business side, for me, I would rate it a four out of ten.

As an overall general rating, I would rate this solution a six out of ten.