Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect Reviews

• 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.

The UML modeling, Use Case Modeling, ability to import custom graphics and map to UML objects, document templates and generation. I would rate the solution as 9/10 as a "project team UML documentation" platform.

5/10 as an "Enterprise Architecture" requirements platform. Mainly as it lacks the ability (or I lack knowing how to) lock specific objects to specific uses.

UML Use Case modeling with complete requirement statement generation.

I would rate EA as a 5/10 as an "Enterprise Architecture" requirements platform. Mainly as it lacks the ability to lock specific objects, object types to specific users or user groups.

I have used it for over eight years.

No. Have deployed in both standalone and team/shared repository environments.

No, the product is very stable.

No. We scaled to a team of about 8 people with no issues using SQL Server as the repository.

I never interacted with Customer Service.. So that speaks to stability and usability.

I never interacted with Technical Support. So that speaks to stability and usability.

Yes, we used Rational Rose and we switched because of cost of prior solution.

Very straight forward.

In house - we have deployed this platform for numerous IT and Business Process teams.

Ensure you have fully reviewed your documentation patterns with the entire team.

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.

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.

We use it mainly for business process modelling, data modelling, and requirement specifications.

We have three licenses being used by a team of project managers. We can work collectively instead of various people doing the same thing.

And we can generate up-to-date documentation for our customers.

We would like to see improvements in the documentation generator: templates, styles, and content.

I have used it for five years.

I have not encountered any deployment issues at all. We know how to configure databases from other projects. I think this can be the most difficult thing for others.

For me, it would be better if we could use the 64-bit version of ODBC.

I have encountered any stability issues very rarely. It happened some time ago; the whole OS crashed after a specific set of steps being performed (repeatable). I do not see this in the current version.

We use it in a small environment, so I can't say too much about scalability. We also used the Lite version for our customers and we liked it.

Customer service is very good. We've been obtaining offers fast. However, it looks like we need to renew our licenses soon - and have no any information from the vendor.

I have never used technical support.

We previously used rational tools (Rose, RSA and some other rational tools as well). This product is much cheaper and enough for our needs.

Initial setup was not complex. As mentioned, people installing the database server version (the only one that makes sense for us) can have some difficulties.

An in-house team implemented it.

I don't know specific numbers, but just one project is enough to generate profits. We have about 20 projects a year.

I recommend buying higher versions; I mean versions with more options than the simplest one. We do not use flexible licensing, but I'm sure for big installations, flexible licensing makes sense, while for small ones, fixed licensing is ok.

Before choosing this product, we did some research. We had been using Rational and PowerDesigner from Sybase (now SAP), and we tried Embarcadero.

For others and for us: we'd like to buy the product along with courses or access to courses about specific parts of working with projects. We'd like to have a dedicated BPMN2 course, for example, that is prepared with the use of Sparx tools.

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.

The way one can set up relationships between components. When doing architecture this helps to determine impact on the IT landscape when components are removed, moved and changed.

For software architecture the UML components are a great help. It also helps when creating code from the diagrams.

From an architectural point of view it is easy to define the application landscape and maintain the relationships between components. This helps when the current state application architecture is considered especially by architects new to an organisation. It also assists the embedded architects to design the future state architecture more effectively.

The UX/UI seems a bit dated and clunky and I would like to see a refresh of this. The application UX does not align to the newest design principles one can find on the web these days. It might also be time to adapt EA to work in a mobile environment (tablets not phones). The Information architecture aspects of the product is also not as strong as it can be but still offers good value for money.

I've been using it for two years.

We have had no issues with the deployment.

We have had no issues with the stability.

We have had no issues scaling it for our needs.

I personally have not used any of the customer service offered as I have been able to resolve most of my problem via the online help and FAQ’s. I have found the online help to be extremely detailed.

I have used MS Visio (various versions) before and have found that EA provides a far better documentation environment. It is definitely easier to keep diagrams ordered and filed away in EA than with Visio.

The setup was quite easy. The installation instructions and database setup is straight forward.

It was an easy install for our in-house team.

We never determined the ROI on the product but the documentation we have available at our fingertips is priceless.

Pricing is available on the website and very reasonable for a product of this nature. I have even acquired the product myself in a personal capacity at home for little side IT projects I do after hours.

What are you waiting for! If you do not use EA in any of your architecture, BA or design teams you are falling behind.

There are many of them. I like the graphical appearance of the elements. It is easy to group them and see the relations between them. The most valuable part is the code engineering, both for databases and source code. Using it, I can see the relationship between tables or classes.

I am the only user of EA as I am a system designer. I use it to make reports from it and what I give to the developers. I am sure that the process of the developing of our product is faster and more secure through using Sparx.

I think the project management part should be easier to use. I would like to give only people and times to an element, and I would like to see a simple list - name of the element, name of the resource and time and it would be fine to export the result into Excel.

For me the other problem is that the reports to HTML do not appear in the newest browsers.

I have used it for three months. I used one of the earlier version four years ago for half year.

I had no issues installing it.

I have had no issues with running it.

We have not scaled it as I am the only user in the company.

I've never needed to contact them

I have used Sybase Power Designer for database design, but I think Sparx is more comprehensive.

It was easy for me. The EA Example project was very useful. However, when I encountered a specific question it was difficult to find the right answer on the Sparx website.

I implemented it by myself.