Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect Reviews

We are mostly using the ArchiMate language to describe enterprise or solution architecture, along with a bit of use cases. We are producing quite large models, with over 10,000 elements and relationships. Sometimes, we prepare the designs, describe the models, and automatically generate documentation from them.

The solution allows us to quickly present designs and concepts to customers and get their feedback, thereby moving the project forward step by step. We work with the model to prepare the templates for document generation and deliver the final documentation to the customer efficiently.

At the beginning of a project, we train people and define a metamodel that will be used. We then define the structure of the repository and organize it in a reasonable way. This ensures structure and clarity. In practice, we've tried to use the reusable asset service with some customers, yet it wasn’t very successful. Most of the time, we don't use it because it's not straightforward to explain to people.

Whenever I begin a new project with Sparx, I have to spend time training people on how to use it since it is not straightforward. Although it's a powerful product with plenty of features, it's not easy for even experienced users to find their way without guidance. This is not the most user-friendly solution.

I have been working with Sparx Enterprise Architect for more than ten years.

I’ve been quite satisfied with the stability. I have not really experienced major troubles with it. Occasionally, it may be a network connectivity problem. It is usually not an issue with Sparx. It happens from time to time that my model stops responding, but it is rare.

For me, scaling the solution is more or less okay. We have managed really big models and did not face large problems. We typically work with models that involve up to 50 modelers and as many as 10,000 elements and 20,000 relationships without significant difficulties.

The good news is that I have not needed technical support very often. We may have some basic level of support with our company user, however, I am not sure how much our IT team uses it. I usually find solutions in forums or devise my own solutions.

Positive

I last set up the solution four years ago, and it was not very difficult. Now, our IT personnel handle this task, and it is effectively a routine process for them. It's a no-brainer for our IT team.

We have an IT guy who sets everything up, creating the model as needed.

One of the reasons many public sector institutions in the Czech Republic use it is that it provides a very good price-performance ratio. While it might be cumbersome to learn, it still delivers excellent results for the cost involved.

I have heard that large SAP installations have started using LeanIX. Biz Design has been present in the Czech Republic market, However it appears not very successful. Orbus and other solutions are known here, but their presence isn't strong.

The integration of Sparx with some AI features could be beneficial. For specific domains, it would be useful if Sparx could ensure designs conform to metamodel requirements, especially for public sector clients adhering to strict modeling standards. I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

Modeling future solutions and using BPMN or use cases. So, in general, creating direct accounts.

We use it On the analyst level. So, analysts create specifications or storage using this tool. 

Sparx helped us facilitate better system modeling and design in our organization.  

I personally find the tool quite powerful tool and benefical, especially given its modeling features and traceability. However, I rarely use this tool now due to my management position.

In general, we now have a problem with Sparx Enterprise Architect because many analysts think it's too complicated to use in a giant environment. So, two years ago, it was used very, very often, and it was a basic tool in the organization. Now, there's a discussion. Is it worth using Enterprise Architect in the company? We need a better, lighter tool to create, for instance, user storage. So, our company is at a specific stage in our product development or software development, where there are some people who want to use it in connection with something like Papyrus, for instance.

For engineering, it's not a good description because it's complicated and for analysts in a dry environment. In the agile environment, the analyst focuses on use cases or creating user stories for support. It's not user-friendly for them.

It is not not user-friendly. But in general, it's complicated for very simple activities. For example, when we know and use Enterprise Architect well, and we can use all these features for such analysts, it's no problem to use it. 

But new analysts, modern analysts who work in a giant environment, don't want to learn how to use Enterprise Architect in the environment because they think it's too complicated and has too many functions.  

There should be ways to find what you need easily and use only the functions relevant to our project. For example, if we're just analyzing a small project, we don't necessarily need tracing or tons of diagrams.

We've also had issues installing the Proof of Concept (POC) for Sparx Prolaborate. Many people found it overly complicated and needed improvement. Overall, user-friendliness is a major pain point for Sparx in my company.

So, Sparx could look at similar products with a more user-friendly interface in the industry.

There are people who use Enterprise Architect religiously, and there are others who prefer simpler tools like point UML for just drawing diagrams. It depends on the needs of the project.

Another point for improvement would be enhancing the versioning of models. Although there's a way to establish timelines, it's not as powerful as it could be.

We use it in our company. I have been using it for ten years. 

The stability has been good and satisfactory. I would rate the stability a ten out of ten. 

Since each team uses its repository, the need to scale hasn't arisen. There are around 20 to 30 end users using this solution. 

However, a web browser version would be advantageous, considering current trends towards cloud-based solutions. The desktop version is somewhat limiting.

While we've attempted to use it for integration purposes, such as contract creation, there are challenges, especially with unique hardware integrations. It often proves simpler to use external tools for software development. 

In general, we don't need support since we have an internal team in our company that maintains the queries related to this solution. 

I'm not well-versed in many other tools of this scale, though I've seen Visual Paradigm, which seems nice. However, Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect has been used by our company for many years, making it a staple tool for us. 

Despite some thinking it's complicated for modern development, its utility for those familiar with it is undeniable. I would recommend it, as we don't consider replacing it due to any significant shortcomings.

I would rate my experience with the initial setup a ten out of ten, with ten being very easy to set up. It is very easy. 

However, setting up a common repository requires additional steps, or you need to place it in a dedicated SQL server. For instance, using an SQL server would make it easier to integrate creating a database or analytics script directly into Enterprise Architect. 

Because no (as far as I remember), there's a need to run scripts to download them from your page and run them separately. It should be integrated into the wizard to create a remote repository. 

So basic installations are rather easy, in my opinion. However, more complicated setups for groups and people need some technical skills and experience.

It's reasonably priced for large organizations, though it may be perceived as expensive for individual users.

I would definitely recommend using this solution for its modeling features. Improvements are always welcome in any tool. We're looking forward to a web browser version, among other enhancements. There's always room for improvement.

For me, it is a ten out of ten. 

We use Sparx to create enterprise-level architecture in high-level environments and ticketing IT landscapes.

The solution saved a lot of time, about 30%.

I like that this tool contains all of my needs. I have AWS, GCP, and Azure icons. The tool assures collaboration, where my diagrams and graphics are automatically shared amongst the team. I also like the maturity of this tool, where I can present different layers depending on the audience. For example, is this a board or at the IT director level? or is it a developer? I can organize my graphics accordingly.

Another thing I like about the tool is the notation. Features like UML are available, so the tool checks things for me.

The dashboard and connectivity could be improved.

I've used Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect for more than eight years.

I rate the solution's scalability an eight out of ten, and we have 25 users using it.

I rate the solution's pricing a five out of ten.

I recommend Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect and rate it a nine out of ten.

I have used the solution to manage software architecture.

The solution offers different types of models and features apart from diagrams. It also supports giant patterns for software systems with a high level of extraction independent from implementation networks. 

The solution's interface is very complex. Its usability could be easy. Also, its layout could be improved regarding quality control and making recommendations.

It is a stable solution.

Around five executives used the solution actively in my previous company. It is scalable for larger projects.

It is simple to build the first model for the solution.

The solution is quite expensive.

I advise others to understand the project requirements while making purchase decisions. If you have an extensive and complex software development project, go for Sparx Systems. But, if it's a small project, look for other tools.

I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

The solution is used for Modeling enterprise architecture artifacts, and also for project delivery artifacts as well. So solution architectures, designs. Sometimes I've used it for requirement gathering for functional and non- functional.

Working with the solution being right around keeping an asset repository that various projects and programs can utilize. So it's about reusability of assets and making sure that a baseline can be achieved against which a target can be models. So it allows the baseline to be models and maintained well.

Sparx has got a range of modeling features, and I am comfortable with all its offering. I've used a lot of tools over the phone. I found EA Spark, probably the most feature rich product all in all compared to other products. The solution is very cost-effective and that is its best feature. It's a very good delivery architecture tool, which also has enterprise architecture capabilities, and it's got full life cycle processes and software development. So for me, it's a pretty comprehensive tool

The Portfolio Management features can be added in the next release. As it helps you to manage more portfolio of projects and architectures of cost projects on a portfolio level. This would be an important feature in the next release.

I have been using the solution for fifteen years. 

It is a stable solution.

It is a scalable solution. I have used it for large organisations.

The technical support team is good. 

The initial setup is easy because you could use it in a single license on a desktop, or you can get the server license SaaS solution, which is equally as good, but it's a it's a very simple and easy product to adopt for embedding. I have used the Client Data Environment for deployment. The deployment takes a couple of week's time. Depending on who supports it and how the service operating model is, it's  easy to maintain the support.

Enterprise licensing is competitive. What would be helpful if they load the pricing for consultants, you know, people who are consultants for clients. So the license is fine for end-user organizations. Still, they should consider lowering the license to support this adoption, particularly for people who are consultants like myself.

The solution is a very intuitive product for me. It has a lot of capabilities and covers enterprise and solutions architecture. It also has a lot of ability to integrate with third-party products, which is good, and they focus it on being a modelling tool, which is very helpful. It has a very adaptable and usable tool tool tool within enterprises.

I would advice people to use the trial versions and assess its functionality, and then from that, decide on the suitable adoption model and embedding model in the organisation depending on the requirements.

I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten

My company uses Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect for data modeling, but it's not being used very much because it's not a suitable tool. It's a UML-based toolset, and my company was looking to do entity-relationship modeling, so Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is not as suitable. My only involvement with Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect was to try and do some data modeling on a MySQL database based on AWS.

Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect didn't improve my company. I'd rather use Visio to do my diagramming because it's a tool that's easier to use.

I didn't have any problems in terms of the stability of Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect. I also found the tool easy to set up.

I didn't find any valuable features in Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect because you cannot use it for re-engineering. I wanted to re-engineer the database, and it was almost impossible. I couldn't find a way.

One room for improvement in Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is that it's not very friendly. Another room for improvement in the tool is that it doesn't enable you to import the metadata from a database very easily, so reverse engineering of a database was very difficult. Its database modeling and entity-relationship modeling functions need improvement.

An additional feature I'd like to see in the next release of Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is the re-engineering of databases into logical models, if that feature's not yet there, because I haven't checked.

I've used Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect on and off for about two years now.

The stability of Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is fine. I've never had any trouble with it breaking down.

I never tried to scale Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect, so I'm unable to comment on its scalability. I'm a single user only.

I never contacted the technical support for Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect.

I used ER/Studio and erwin Data Modeler in the past, and I had stopped using them and instead used Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect because I moved companies. erwin Data Modeler and ER/Studio were very expensive tools, and their costs couldn't be justified.

The initial setup for Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect was okay. I downloaded it from the internet, and I had to put a key in. The tool was really easy to set up. On a scale of one to five, the initial setup is a five for me, particularly once I got the key in. Deployment took twenty minutes once I got the key.

Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect was deployed through a reseller.

I have not seen ROI from using Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect.

The license for Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is paid yearly, but I don't handle that area. It's good for its price, so I'm rating it a five out of five, but I'm not using it much. I also don't have information regarding additional costs apart from the standard licensing fees.

I didn't evaluate other options because Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect was imposed on me. It was what my company was using when I joined.

I'm not sure about which version of Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect I'm using. My company has a corporate license, and I get updates, but I don't know which version I have at the moment.

I currently have a desktop version of Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect, but there are two or three other people who have the server version, and a repository was supposed to be set up for sharing among myself and the others, but there isn't much success with that. I believe the tool is deployed on-premises, but I don't know what the repository is, because I have a standalone version that runs on my Windows desktop.

There are five users of Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect in my company, and they're into enterprise architecture. For deployment and maintenance of the tool, only one person is required because of the small volume of users. Personally, I don't have plans of increasing usage of Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect because it's not the tool for me. I'm not a person who likes UML, but I do know that my company is looking to build a server-based version of the tool and extend its use. My company is looking at other tools as well, such as LeanIX, Visio, and Lucidchart.

My advice to others looking into using Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is to make sure it meets all their requirements, and that it has all the capabilities they need. I would recommend looking at some training, because the tool is not very intuitive for data modeling.

My rating for Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is a five out of ten. It's an average solution, so it's a five for me. It's in the middle. What would make it a ten out of ten for me is if they improve their data modeling capability because I do data modeling and Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is not a very good data modeling tool.

I have used the solution for BPMN Modeling for a German Bank where regulatory processes were required to model for around 24 countries. After process modeling, process harmonization, process standardization was also included. SPARX EA, with a variety of notations and custom attributes, helped track the process delivery for each center smoothly. 

We have also created application, information, and data models linked them with BPMN process models. So net-net, process modeling, process improvement, and process optimization were the primary use cases.

We could capture the process models around 24 countries with all their local variations. After process modeling, we have depicted the similarities and differences in SAPRX for process harmonization, process standardization. 

SPARX EA, with a variety of notations and custom attributes, helped track the process delivery for each center smoothly. We have also created applications, information, and data models linked with BPMN process models. 

SPARX EA is well suited for a client that does not have an Enterprise Architecture or Business Process and that needs to get started, so you can leverage the product right from scratch. You can import from Word and Excel. That is the best feature. The information is available in Excel and you can get started by importing the artifacts in the proper structure. Word documents can also be imported by using the proper plugins. It can be used as a jump-start for a team of five people that can share a common repository. This import/export reduced a lot of licensing requirements too.

When the model is large, it is a bit slow to render. Also sometimes it is difficult (selecting and holding it) to move a single attribute from one entity in the diagram to another. At times check-in and check-out procedures are slow. 

Navigating from EA Models to Business Process Models becomes a nightmare if the repository is heavily loaded. I have worked on some other tools which work pretty well in this area. SPARX Systems should consider improving on this point in their upcoming releases.

I have used the product for around two years.

I use it for enterprise architecture.

It helps in centralizing data or putting our data in one place.

Artifact templates are most valuable.

It can be improved in the area of shared documentation. The idea is that the architecture tool can call back to an enterprise asset, pull that information, and link that as a sub-artifact.

Shared environments are a little bit tricky. Looking at it from an enterprise perspective, there should be a much better shared environment. I've got multiple people in different business units. Once I model an object, others should be able to reuse that same object multiple times. Currently, it's a lengthy process to set that up from scratch.

I last used it six weeks ago. Before that, I used it for about a year.

It is stable.

It is scalable. We have a really small team. I've got three licenses that we're using, and it's all on the desktops.

I haven't yet interacted with them.

We used to use MagicDraw, and the switch was due to cost. MagicDraw was about $32,000.

Its initial setup was straightforward. In terms of the implementation strategy, our organization doesn't have a lot of architects. This is the beginning of doing this the proper way. There is not really a plan in place. We have just put the software in place, and I have started to collect information and put it into the tool.

I've installed it on a local machine. We could also install it on the server. It has fairly low complexity. It comes with the binary. You just install it.

We implemented it ourselves. We had only one person for this.

We have not yet seen an ROI. It's too early.

It's affordable. The only additional cost that we haven't yet figured out is the floating license. If you buy a floating license, you have to have a license management server, which comes at an additional cost that's not discussed. So, we haven't yet used the floating license. That’s because I haven't had a chance to figure that out.

I had a long list. I had about 15 different enterprise-grade architecture tools. I got a bunch of them off the PeerSpot site.

When using this product in a shared environment, in terms of multiple different aspects of the business, it's not really tied together well at the top or out of the box. It takes some configuration. So, you need to understand how to use shared resources to build architecture so that if you are doing architecture on one object inside the enterprise, somebody else should be able to recreate it independently. What you do should be available to those who need to model it. 

I would rate it a seven out of ten.

We use the Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect to guide the enterprise data model used for documentation.

The most valuable feature of Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is the value streams.

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

Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is stable.

I rate the scalability of Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect a four out of five.

We have approximately 60 people in my organization using this solution.

I rate the technical support of Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect a four out of five.

The initial setup of the Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect It's very complicated. It's very difficult to start with the right templates because there are many possibilities. The deployment took approximately two days.

I would rate the ease of implementation of Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect one out of five.

I did the implementation of Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect myself. It's a long whole process to activate it and to be on the right path. It takes a lot of communication with the technical team.

There is no license required for this solution.

My advice to others is to get off to the right start by choosing the correct template. That's very important, otherwise, you will be lost.

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

Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is used by our architects to put out artifacts, collaborate, work together, and share those artifacts. The product is used to maintain the versions of architectural diagrams, use case diagrams, etc.

I'd like Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect to be more stable, and have a more improved performance. It should also have a sharing feature and allow us to easily share artifacts with our business partners, rather than requiring them to install the product on their site first. If people who don't have licenses could also view what we're sharing, that would be great.

I've used Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect for the past 10 years.

This product should be more stable.

The cloud version of Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is scalable, without a doubt.

I'm satisfied with the technical support for Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect.

The initial setup for this product was slightly complicated. It was complicated for the business users, the non-IT teams, and the non-technical teams, but I was able to do the setup myself.

We pay for the license of Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect, and it is a yearly subscription.

I evaluated Visio. I use it in parallel with Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect.

I used Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect on-premises at the start, then later on for other clients, I used it on cloud. I used the latest version on cloud, but for the on-premises deployment, I used an earlier version, but I don't remember the version number.

There is a learning curve with Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect, e.g. to be comfortable and to start using it full-fledged. It took me a month of practice.

On average, we have 50 users of this product, and 20 technical people in charge of its deployment.

I can recommend Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect to other people who may want to start implementing it.

My rating for Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is eight out of ten.