We performed a comparison between iServer and Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Enterprise Architecture Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The initial setup is easy."
"iServer has valuable features for workflow and document management."
"The most valuable features of iServer are the integration with Microsoft Office and the interface is similar to Microsoft applications making them easy to use."
"This is a flexible tool compared to some other solutions."
"It has helped having data lineage in the business cluster, which is used as control artifacts."
"The solution has wide use within Microsoft products. The integration with Microsoft products, and, in particular, Microsoft Office, is great."
"The solution is easily modified to suit your needs."
"There were lots of different requirements, and collaboration and review is one of the biggest things. There is also Office 360 integration, and there's flexibility to use it as a database as well."
"The solution is easy to use, supports SysML and UML, and is able to connect to MATLAB. This is very important for us."
"It is a very flexible product. It can do a lot. It is also a reliable product."
"It is a useful tool for modeling and testing automated processes."
"It is a handy tool for visual modeling that provides opportunities for analysis, design, and support of models using ArchiMate, UML."
"A feature I like most about Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is its ease of use."
"Ability to keep inventory of reusable blocks, and use in different diagrams with views of various templates."
"The solution saved a lot of time, about 30%."
"It has led some teams to do better code reviews - to be less focussed on coding conventions (syntax) and more focussed on the semantics because of the abstraction level clear design affords."
"There could be features for process mining, process simulation, and analytics."
"The modelling needs improvement, specifically forecasting capabilities and scenarios."
"More visualization techniques and ways to report the data might be helpful."
"Requirements management needs to be improved."
"The performance is slow, which is something that should be improved."
"It runs relatively slowly."
"It definitely needs help to improve the visual aspect of the solution."
"We could allocate permissions to use only specific components to the users rather than the entire instance."
"The templates for documentation should be enhanced to include complex documents such as template RFP, or Non functional requirements template."
"The solution needs to offer better support for the mobile-based system. Right now, it's not working."
"From a practical point of view, we need speed and reliability for creating a model and doing some really meaningful tasks such as application landscape, refactoring, etc. These are two primary criteria. Sometimes, when you import something, it creates the object duplicates, or it allows you to do something that you're not supposed to do. For example, validation is missing. This could be frustrating because when you work at a high speed, you need to come back and start fixing things that the tool allowed you to go with, which is not quite good. So, there should probably be some internal mechanisms to advise you about what you're doing and what is probably not the best idea."
"More challenging than other tools to maintain documents and document versions for an architecture board review."
"The database management area was not usable."
"It should be made Windows compatible."
"I think the product is good. When I'm trying to do something specific for some part of project documentation, it's hard to get it figured out if you don't use it all the time. It's such a massive tool, it's hard to figure out how to dig in and get to the documentation where you have to be to get some idea of what to do. There are not a lot of examples that I'm aware of to be able to do that."
"In a future release, they should improve portfolio planning."
More Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect Pricing and Cost Advice →
iServer is ranked 6th in Enterprise Architecture Management with 15 reviews while Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is ranked 2nd in Enterprise Architecture Management with 97 reviews. iServer is rated 7.2, while Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of iServer writes "Enables flexible parameters for any process model and has a valuable document management feature ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect writes "Easy to set up and had no issues with stability, but it's not a very friendly tool, and its database modeling and entity-relationship modeling functions need improvement". iServer is most compared with LeanIX, Visio, ARIS BPA, MEGA HOPEX and BiZZdesign HoriZZon, whereas Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is most compared with Visual Paradigm, Visio, No Magic MagicDraw, Lucidchart and ADOIT. See our Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect vs. iServer report.
See our list of best Enterprise Architecture Management vendors and best Business Process Design vendors.
We monitor all Enterprise Architecture Management reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
Hello,
My advise is to think about Mega EA, according to Garthner analysis , it
is the best EA tools in 2013 and 2014. and since I am using it, I can tell
you that is definitely the best EA tools in my opinion.
I have not used those two. I have used/use IBM Systems Architect, Visual Paradigm and Rational Rose and my experience with those is that is you want true team cooperation, they always ask you to buy something more. Usually there is a separate tool/SW to make teamwork work. Give them all the specs ahead of time so that if something is not there, you can go back and ask for them to fix the problem.
Dorian W Smith