Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect Reviews

We used this solution to implement a turn-key, ERP project. I was the system architect for this project.

As a business analyst, I am responsible for the requirements and arrangement. This solution makes my work very easy. Some of the business processes are very easy to compare when you have the diagrams.

The most valuable features are the Business Process Management and the Architect.

I think that collaboration can be better. It isn't bad but it can be improved. It would be nice if you can have interaction with other users, in a community of some sort, where you can have a discussion and frequently asked questions. It would be best if you don't have to send a text and wait for a measurable time before getting a response.

Some of the attributes do not exist for models, and you have to customize in order to have them. They are supposed to be standard attributes.

The entire interface can be improved.

I think that it is a mature tool, and it's fairly stable.

We found it very difficult to scale this solution.

We're not sure if it was a limitation with the client security, but we had some problems. I don't think that Sparx is non-scalable, but maybe it can try to adapt to different clients.

I am satisfied with the technical support. I have not encountered any problems, so I think that it is one hundred percent.

I found the setup to be simple, but it may be because I am used to the environment. It was implemented as a turn-key project over approximately six months, with the total project being about a year in length.

We handled the implementation.

My advice for somebody implementing this solution is to make sure that they utilize it to its full capacity so that they can draw the greatest value out of it. This product can provide the user with a number of solutions, so one has to make sure that they exploit all of the benefits.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

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.

In my company at the moment, many people have difficulty in using Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect. It is not easy for someone who is not experienced with the platform. It's not the correct level for our requirements. 

You cannot just open and start Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect. This is the entry barrier for inexperienced users. From the perspective of inexperienced users, the product needs improvement.

It supports multiple modeling languages like ArchiMate for database design, software lifecycle visualization, and team management. Merging all of them is a great feature.

Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is okay. I don't see anything that can be improved at the moment. For me it's perfect.

There used to be that feature in ArchiMate Modeling of Enterprise Architect called inherited relationships. The tool used to be equipped with this functionality of showing those relationships and now it's gone. It would be nice if it comes back.

I would like to see Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect more user-friendly and intuitive. This would be great. The product is okay for the experienced user, but for the entry-level people, it's somehow hard. They cannot start without one hour of introductory training.

Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is very stable.

I had some problems in the past when we had 50 concurrent users and it was based on the Oracle database. Because it was based on the Oracle database, we had some issues with performance. I don't know if it was the problem of Enterprise Architect or the wrong setup of the Oracle database. I did encounter some issues with the installations of that site for 50 concurrent users.

Right now we are just starting. It will be probably something around 10 users but not concurrent. For concurrent users, maybe there will be around five. For the main users, it will be about 10. The others are some roles like business process modeling experts, database experts, and solutions architect. In total, there will be three types of main user roles.

With our current project, we don't need technical support. In the past, I had some experience with the technical support team. It was okay. We had some programming issues that were solved. The response time was pretty good.

Aris was our previous tool. It was not extensively used but we decided to go with Enterprise Architect. In my work, sometimes I used Aris combined with Enterprise Architect. Aris was for business processing and Enterprise Architect was for mainly IT architecture.

The initial setup of Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect for the inexperienced user is non-intuitive.

I did the setup on my own based on the knowledge of the customer organization. I was supported by the external company that is experienced with the tool. I used different models for that.

I would advise anyone to find a good partner for guiding the methodology of modeling. Maybe some technical support is required if you need the integration of your tool.

In this project, Aris was the main competition.

I would rate Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect an eight out of ten. It's pretty good, but it's not that intuitive for the beginner user.

I've used it in six organisations over 10 years.

• Ability to use a single shared repository and defined languages, using both ArchiMate as the modelling language and the business language based on the repository contents. 
• It’s easy to deploy in a small workgroup.

• Ability to either offline with replication, documentation, HTML reporting
• The strength of the modelling and analysis tools. 

• Documentation generation needs significant improvement.
• More rigorous support of the ArchiMate rules would be a great improvement.

(Enterprise) solution architecture.

(Enterprise) solution architecture creation.

• Flexibility
• Open DB.

Look and feel.

Architecture Design (component, deployment), Reference Architecture (enterprise, technology) and Solution Management (external artifacts) accessible globally to all of IT via AWS cloud.

Improved cross-functional team collaboration. Dynamic visual activity models improved communication and understanding with the business. Shared repository enabled reuse of model elements by users. Established a well-defined structure to manage whole solutions. Ability to ingest external document artifacts became a viable alternative to SharePoint. UML based modeling enable model-first approach in lieu of document-first approach to solutioning (alternative to Microsoft Office - Word, Excel, Visio, Powerpoint) 

Version 14 menu organization is much better. Ability to ingest external artifacts with added metadata coupled with UML based modeling is moving the organization to a more digital way of working while preserving legacy artifacts.

A better deployment model for the enterprise without relying on HKEY_CURRENT_USER in the registry.

Very stable. Rarely a crash.

In general, performance and scalability is solid. There are times when communication to the shared repository in AWS would be inconsistent, but I think that was due to the corporate network connection

Customer service / technical support is via email only so is constrained to 24 hour turnaround. Otherwise good responses. 

The Solution Architect team used a combination of Visio (UML), Word (Document Templates), Excel (Requirements) and SharePoint (Repository). Sparx replaced all of this while retaining all of the prior tool features and enabled cross-functional team collaboration for solutioning.

There was a learning curve to deployment constrained by needing to install as the user until we figured out how to deploy using MSI scripts, elevated privileges and a standard REGEDIT file containing a Sparx configuration.

Implementation using in-house team.

We gained 10 - 20 percent improvement to productivity (measured by time to complete solution) and improved quality (measured by reviews)

Setup a shared RDBMS repository (SQL, Oracle, etc.), acquire shared license keys and deploy using MSI scripts.

Considered Visio Professional (has a repository), ArchiMate (too high-level), Rational (too costly)

Establish best practices for solutioning including standardized stereotypes. Drive adoption using a hybrid approach of modeling and ingesting external documents since not everyone will learn to model equally using UML.

I use this enterprise solution to trace business needs, analyze information, and for implementation in an international government environment.

Sparx System Enterprise Architect has improved the communication aspect between our architects.

I have found the Meta Model tuning feature useful as it provides me with an overview of all my work needs.

• It should be made Windows compatible. 
• It should have a more appealing UI with zoom in and zoom out features. 
• It needs improvement on the communication part to stakeholders.

It is the perfect tool.

We can easily use it with our new customers.

Its most valuable feature is the Zachman Framework.

The reporting needs improvement.

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.

Cheap and affordable tool to generate architecture artifacts. 

This is a well-known vendor whose tool has been used by at least two colleagues on my team.

It has not improved our organization mainly due to the poor diagramming capabilities within the product, which are outdated and look like Visual Studio 2005. As a result, our architecture team constantly reverts back to Visio diagramming (and Visio's inability to reference defined artifacts).

• Its ability to reference and link to components from any diagram.
• The vast number of frameworks supported to get started with modelling.

Improve the following:

• Report builder
• Diagramming capabilities
• Connector routing and layout algorithms
• Inconsistent UI elements must be tidied up with the toolbox gaps removed.
• Alignment and button sizes need to be made consistent. 
  

Recommended features would include:

• A refreshed diagramming canvas (even outsourced to a third-party diagramming vendor, if necessary).
• Replace built-in report writer with direct integration to Microsoft Word.
• Improve dashboard "Getting Started" guidance to direct modelling activities according to "what" I wish to achieve, e.g., "I wish to generate a Platform Application Map," and all the most appropriate/popular types of diagrams are made available.
• Improve support to intuitively generate hierarchical navigation diagrams.