We performed a comparison between iGrafx Process360 Live Platform and No Magic MagicDraw based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Business Process Design solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution is very stable."
"Web diagramming and RACI have helped expedite the process, capture, and ownership initiatives of our organization."
"The solution's technical support is of good quality since they offer fast and seamless services."
"Provides a valuable BPMN feature."
"It has simplified compliance with regulations and company standards."
"iGrafx gives you the capability of documenting your process and then the ability to use it as a tool for analysis to identify the loopholes and shortcomings of your process."
"Simulation is most valuable."
"Another good feature is that the numbering of the shapes in iGrafx is much easier and more convenient, in comparison to what is found in Visio. So far I haven't found anything similar to what I have with iGrafx, in that regard."
"When you look at it, No Magic is an all-encompassing tool. You can use it for business architecture design. You can use it for deploying an ERP system across your enterprise. However, it was initially designed and developed for model-based systems engineering. That's the systems engineering required to either produce an IP system or product. It takes away the mounds of paper and puts it into a model. It enables you to generate significant savings by modeling that new product or that system before you ever start developing a prototype."
"The most valuable feature is the amount of flexibility that one has to model, which is great for an individual."
"The technical support is very good."
"Offers good standards compliance and is user-friendly."
"It is pretty easy to use. It is pretty versatile."
"I like the traceability feature. Whoever is working with the product would be sure of the things that could be affected if they decided to affect one of the other companies. For example, let's say that an engineer starts a new project optimization problem by adjusting the thickness of metal sheets. However, the engineers only see a reduced number of affections, but when we use the requirement traceability, they can see the whole picture. That's the main aspect that we were promoting with this tool."
"I think one of the key things is the plugins for integration with requirements management tools like Doors"
"The most valuable features are the visibility, standard compliance, and interface."
"With iGrafx, the implementation and the licensing were pretty complex."
"Dragging and dropping shapes is not as user-friendly as in Visio. In Visio, it's very easy to work with shapes and in very few minutes you can plot a whole, multi swim-lane, cross-functional process."
"I would love to see a template and shapes for customer journey mapping."
"The look and feel, along with the ease of use of the solution's web modeling version, is an area with certain shortcomings."
"It would be helpful to be able to do more analytics and generate reports on historical documents that have already been uploaded to the server."
"The price could be more competitive."
"It would be nice to have a Spanish user interface available to us."
"It can be more user-friendly."
"They don't really support code engineering, and that's why we have to move to Enterprise Architect. MagicDraw is stuck at C++03 standards, whereas most C++ programs today want to use the latest definition of the C++ standards. We were at C++11, and we wanted to do code engineering with C++11 or 17, but they didn't support it. That pushed us into a different tool, which is Sparx Enterprise Architect."
"There could be a trial version for students."
"The documentation for MagicDraw and the video tutorials compared to other competitors is an area for improvement."
"The cost of upgrading the product should be lower."
"It would be better if the User Interface were updated. At the moment, it's a classic environment. It reminds me of the old Windows interface, for example, Windows 95. It would be better to make it more user-friendly. It would also be better if it could integrate with SAP solutions. It isn't easy to find experts in the field. It's hard to find people around the globe that have the necessary skills and expertise to manage this solution. For example, in our case, we needed someone with refrigeration knowledge that also knew how to use the tool, and that was a challenge. We also had issues relating to erasing. Sometimes, it kept it in the background and didn't erase it at all. We had to review the entire list to ensure that the item was deleted."
"It's very focused on specific modern languages and it doesn't do necessarily general systems software engineering with diagrams. They should expand the diagram types for the languages."
"The technical support is not very good."
"When I am working with my Mac and I right-click to copy and paste, it doesn't work."
More iGrafx Process360 Live Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
iGrafx Process360 Live Platform is ranked 15th in Business Process Design with 15 reviews while No Magic MagicDraw is ranked 10th in Business Process Design with 17 reviews. iGrafx Process360 Live Platform is rated 8.4, while No Magic MagicDraw is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of iGrafx Process360 Live Platform writes " A reasonably stable BPM solution useful for process governance and process mining". On the other hand, the top reviewer of No Magic MagicDraw writes "Pretty easy to use and versatile, but doesn't support code engineering and can be overly complicated at times". iGrafx Process360 Live Platform is most compared with Visio, ARIS BPA, SAP Signavio Process Manager, Camunda and Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect, whereas No Magic MagicDraw is most compared with Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect, Visio, Visual Paradigm, Lucidchart and erwin Data Modeler by Quest. See our No Magic MagicDraw vs. iGrafx Process360 Live Platform report.
See our list of best Business Process Design vendors.
We monitor all Business Process Design 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.