No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

No Magic MagicDraw vs iServer comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 3, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

iServer
Ranking in Business Process Design
17th
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
18
Ranking in other categories
Enterprise Architecture Management (11th)
No Magic MagicDraw
Ranking in Business Process Design
14th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.0
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2026, in the Business Process Design category, the mindshare of iServer is 3.6%, up from 1.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of No Magic MagicDraw is 2.4%, down from 2.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Business Process Design Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
No Magic MagicDraw2.4%
iServer3.6%
Other94.0%
Business Process Design
 

Featured Reviews

AHMEDIBRAHIM1 - PeerSpot reviewer
Enterprise Architecture practice head at Positive Side Consultancy
Enables flexible parameters for any process model and has a valuable document management feature
We use the product for various critical functions within our environment, particularly in a government entity, where it assists in governance, workflow management, and generating reports and live database activities. It enables flexible parameters for any process model iServer has valuable…
reviewer2080611 - PeerSpot reviewer
System Engineer at a consultancy with 51-200 employees
Ease of use and real-time collaboration empower effective teamwork and streamlined development
For CAMEO, it's not only the ease of use, it's versatility, its communicability, but Rhapsody is the worst tool I've ever used. It is very difficult, not user-friendly, and very expensive. It works only with its IBM counterparts. SPARX Enterprise Architecture is very easy to use, but it's limited. It gives you an idea of how your model is developing, so this feature helps maintain integrity or correctness of system models. It's really a good feature to have. You've got to have the simulation toolkit installed to be able to do that, and that works really well. The MagicDraw or CAMEO system is good on its own, but it should be integrated and should come out of the box with the simulation toolkit because there are some things you can't do without it, making it very difficult to have to look for another license to be able to do that. I would prefer that it come with the simulation toolkit.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Good and effective reporting features, which help in decision making."
"I love how there are no milestone swimlanes."
"From September 2014 through January 2015, I received help from the tech support staff of iServer, who were very prompt and almost instantaneously responded, and if it was something difficult, they brought three to four people to talk with me and then solved the problem within minutes."
"The solution has wide use within Microsoft products. The integration with Microsoft products, and, in particular, Microsoft Office, is great."
"Central repository holding single version of truth."
"It has helped having data lineage in the business cluster, which is used as control artifacts."
"Integrating the Microsoft documents to the product and visualization matrix where we can see the end-to-end relationship of the network is of great importance to our company."
"The initial setup is easy."
"There is a lot of documentation available on the Internet to understand its functionality."
"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 alone can maintain all architecture documentation for a larger project as well as for one or two selected systems."
"We use it to build the physical and logical domains to hold requirements, specifications, use cases, and all the way down to class definitions."
"The most valuable features with No Magic MagicDraw are its ease of use; you can put this in front of a 12-year-old and they would know what to do right away."
"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."
"We are getting away from the old ways of writing a lot of papers and requirements documents, architecture documents, technical solution documents, interface documents - those days are gone."
 

Cons

"There can be some performance issues using the solution that should be improved. When you make modifications modify to files there are embedded data within that can take a while to process."
"There could be features for process mining, process simulation, and analytics."
"I do not find it friendly to use."
"There are other solutions out there that have a better user interface."
"Setting up the Portal was very complex. We required a lot of support from the vendor."
"Enhancing integration options with ERP or ITSM-related solutions for triggering automated requests for process definitions, changes, and tracking them in the iServer."
"Customer service can be improved as the vendor is based in UK. Having regional support could improve time and communications."
"Overall, I would say that it's a poor man's EA repository. It seems like a good idea, but doesn't really work in practice."
"The technical support is not very good."
"There's lots of documentation. They process multiples of guides. They've got all kinds of guides and documentation out there, but it's kind of hard to find. There are a lot of videos. You can go to YouTube and find videos on how it's been used in different ways, but it just kind of scratches the surface."
"They don't really support code engineering, and that's why we have to move to Enterprise Architect."
"The MagicDraw or CAMEO system is good on its own, but it should be integrated and should come out of the box with the simulation toolkit because there are some things you can't do without it, making it very difficult to have to look for another license to be able to do that."
"The software is a little more challenging if you haven't been trained on how to use it."
"The price of the solution could be reduced."
"However, there are some technical features that you have to study and do research on to be able to understand."
"One potential area for improvement is the recommendation feature. At times, we face challenges in locating specific features, and we have to reach out for assistance in finding the information we need."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product has a moderate pricing."
"The price of iServer is reasonable compared to other solutions."
"Aim for the exact number of people who shall define/review approve and view the processes, as it will impact the cost."
"It's about 13K to set up and 9K for the license for three months. I think it's about 20K a year, but we haven't firmed up on pricing yet because the price depends on how long we commit to the solution."
"The solution is cheaper than its competitors."
"They offer annual subscriptions for developing countries, which are not affordable for small or medium businesses."
"In addition to the initial cost, you have to pay annually for support in order to get the upgrades."
"I rate the pricing a ten out of ten. It is an expensive product compared to software for model-based system engineering."
"The price of No Magic MagicDraw could improve. The price of the solution is too expensive for smaller-sized companies. There should be a better pricing model."
"I would say licensing would be anywhere from $3,500 to $6,500 per person or per seat (it's a per seat style license)."
"The licensing is on a yearly basis, and it's expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Business Process Design solutions are best for your needs.
915,341 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
22%
Government
9%
Construction Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Manufacturing Company
20%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Government
10%
Outsourcing Company
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise10
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business14
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise7
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for No Magic MagicDraw?
Maybe the price is a little bit high for a small company to acquire this tool. However, they offer trial versions and trial licenses for members of INCOSE.
What needs improvement with No Magic MagicDraw?
For CAMEO, it's not only the ease of use, it's versatility, its communicability, but Rhapsody is the worst tool I've ever used. It is very difficult, not user-friendly, and very expensive. It works...
What is your primary use case for No Magic MagicDraw?
I deal with DOD lifecycle acquisition sorts of things as some of the main use cases currently, and I expect to continue using it for more than 25 years.
 

Also Known As

No data available
MagicDraw
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Barclays, Cathay Pacific, Deloitte, British Gas, MasterCard
Northrop Grumman, Labcorp, Deposco, ClearView Training, IT Services Promotion Agency, Intelligent Chaos, Metalithic Systems Inc., Sodifrance
Find out what your peers are saying about No Magic MagicDraw vs. iServer and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
915,341 professionals have used our research since 2012.