Ardoq Reviews

Our use cases are related to LeanIX for conceptual data models, and then we moved over to Ardoq for license agreements or something because it was cheaper.

Overall, it covers what our enterprise architect wants.

It doesn't seem good for data modeling. So, I would like to see some features related to that in future releases.

We have been using this solution for six months. We've gone recently through a proof of concept, so it's in the early stages.

It is a stable solution. No complaints at the moment. It's a new thing, and we're still figuring it out.

We're not a very big company, so it should be sufficient. We have around 50 end users using this solution in our company.

We pay for extended support, and they seem to be great. 

The customer service and support are pretty good and very helpful.

Positive

We used LeanIX. We switched because there was a change of staff, and it was cost-driven. LeanIX wasn't working for us anymore.

Our deployment model is on the cloud. For externally hosted applications, we use AWS. Internally, we use Azure because it's easier with Active Directory.

We employed consultants from Ardoq for the deployment.

Overall, I would rate it around six out of ten. The training environment wasn't very intuitive, but maybe with more use, it will get better.

We need to learn to navigate it. So, there is a potential learning curve in this tool. I use it once in a blue moon, and not very frequently because I have not found it very intuitive. 

Snapshots are the most valuable feature. Other features I like include web interface, and commu

The construction is ugly. I need to make a lot of hand movements to deal with data in the system. It's horrible and not automated work at all.  So, I would like more automation. 

More integration features are also required because the main construction block of our block is stable. All the data is stored in the table for use by the user. So, if I'd like to go to the portal and fetch something from our email doc, I need to do it with Excel, OpenExcel format. It is not suitable. It would be better to do it with some Microsoft system, such as Microsoft 365 for Office or Google Chrome. This is because if you use an open standard like OpenExcel, you will also need to support other services like Google Docs and LibreOffice. This can be difficult and time-consuming.

I have been using this solution for about four months. We use the latest version. 

I would rate the stability an eight out of ten  because there were some errors and some misunderstandings. The site of this Ardoq. It is not intuitive. The teaching form is also ugly, with too much water and too much interaction learning system overload. Too much interaction. It is much more suitable to make some manuals for the engineers.

Scalability as a standalone system is good, given the information that has been described inside Ardoq. But not the scalability as a third-party system or with integration with other systems. Because in this direction, the scalability is about zero for Ardoq, but scalability as far as the system is implemented, some information, it's okay. It's a good system.

In total, there are more than five end users using this solution in our organization. 

We used only internal support. 

I have met one installation in the docker and run the installation in the cloud. Both of them are too difficult, not easy. And if you are for taking your system, SCED system, without any code, if it's easy for each user, then it is not too difficult. Not an issue. The user can handle and manage your system setup.

I would rate my experience with the initial setup a three out of ten, with one being difficult and ten being easy. The entire setup has taken about an hour.

Ardoq is a pretty easy solution to use. It is close to the C4 standard architecture system, but it is not exactly the same. I am not sure what the difference is, but I still recommend it.

Overall, I would give it a nine out of ten. It is a great solution, especially compared to other solutions on the market.