Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect Reviews

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.

This solution is the design tool for all enterprise architecture work. It is used to depict the current situation, as well as the future platform, and discuss the gaps required to implement the future platform.

It has provided a single repository for all architecture work. Then, the models can be shared between the architects and other information management users. 

It is customizable, which allows it to be tailored to our environment. It provides several template frameworks. We can customize them based on control parameters to be used by all staff. 

It is weak in regards to data modelling. It does not provide logical or physical data modelling or the ability to migrate from conceptual to physical and back. It is limited in its reverse engineering capabilities. It uses a UML-based modelling technique which does not provide sufficient control of metadata and standards.  

There was no way to implement data integrity and referential integrity constraints. I do not even think it has the domain concept. It does not provide the package concept, so model elements can be inherited by other model elements.

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.

• Support for UML diagrams – use cases and behavioral model
• Logical models
• Excellent documentation templates, like what you see is what you get

Team collaboration. It’s like the Microsoft TFS equivalent for architecture.

It has everything spanning from project management to reverse engineering code to test cycle management, and I believe you can link them all together. Its side effect is the complexity of getting it all together in this one tool. 

I would probably separate the testing, PM and code reverse engineering features as an add-on feature rather as part of one tool.

There have been no issues with the deployment.

We have had no issues with the stability.

We have had no issues scaling it for our needs.

I really don’t have a basis for comparison with any other product like I-Server or Abacus Evolution. For what Sparx EA can offer, it’s the best tool that we had.

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.

• 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.

• ArchiMate
• UML

Our clients have used EA to document the architecture for enterprise architecture as well as for software architecture. The architectural blueprints in Sparx EA acting as key reference repository for the transformation projects. 

Sparx EA has limited visualization capabilities compared to leaders in this segment. The Sparx EA lacks portfolio Management capabilities. 

I've been using it for more than two years.

We have had no issues with deploying it.

There have been no stability issues.

We have had no issues scaling it as needed.

It was straightforward.

We did it in-house.

We have evaluated other products from competing vendors. Sparx EA has cost advantage over competing tools in the market.  

• ArchiMate - motivational modeling for requirements management
• ArchiMate - business modeling
• Achrimate - information system modelling
• UML - data modeling and use case modelling
• BPMN - business process modelling

It is now based on business drivers, goals and requirements, and linked to business and IT functions. This results in traceability and alignment with business objectives.

• Modeling could be more user-friendly
• ArchiMate - support for derived relations
• Define features and attributes as separate components
• More flexible document generation features

I've used it for around four years.

No issues encountered.

Not in the more recent versions.

No issues encountered.

We had no issues and questions were answered satisfactorily.

We had no issues.

Before I used IBM Rational Rose. I switched because of my move from IBM to another employer.

It was straightforward. It was very easy to setup a new repository from scratch. The tool offers sufficient flexibility to alter the structure.

We've done it in-house.

The ROI is hard to express, as it's indirect and hard to quantify the benefits such as quality improvement. Based on personal productivity, the professional edition it has resulted in over an 100% ROI.

It has low license cost in comparison to other tools. The floating user license works fine for us.

Other solutions were exclude based on pricing.

Take into account it as a rather technical oriented product. It lacks a number of EA features such as ERM, PPM, APM etc. However, ArchiMate does provide some functionality in this field.