"Its availability is very good."
"This is a complete package with all of the functionality that we need."
"Every module sets up the same information in a unique repository."
"The most valuable parts of this solution are the richness of its features and its easy interface."
"The most valuable feature is that the software controls everything from a single management window."
"The support experience in Latin America is great."
"What I find the most valuable is the process workflow. It is really good."
"HOPEX has a panel that offers various views. I think that is very good. MEGA has an app for integrating with a lot of apps. We help our clients integrate HOPEX with a different product like Apple Gateway, for example. I've been with the company for 15 years, and we connect with everything. Our clientele includes almost all of the banks in Mexico."
"I would rate MagicDraw a nine out of ten because of the price. Enterprise Architect has a lot of bugs and MagicDraw is a lot more accurate and flexible. It's a level better."
"The most valuable features are the visibility, standard compliance, and interface."
"The beauty of MagicDraw is that it has a simulation part, so you can simulate your model to validate it. The simulation allows you to bring in code off of an external code that you can write to set up the simulation and execute the code."
"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 technical support is very good."
"The most valuable feature is the amount of flexibility that one has to model, which is great for an individual."
"I think one of the key things is the plugins for integration with requirements management tools like Doors"
"The MBFC capability of MagicDraw is higher than the other competitors."
"We have a very close relationship with MEGA representatives in Mexico, and we ask them why they don't offer impact analysis. For example, we have a server in the center and provide the client a view of what's in the peripheral area, like one cluster, application, process area, and services. We want to offer our clients that level of visibility with HOPEX."
"MEGA HOPEX's problem is that it is expensive, but it's a fantastic tool."
"The features are limited. I'm hoping in the future the solution will be bigger and include more items. Right now, overall, it needs more."
"Better documentation and training would be helpful."
"It would be great if this solution could integrate with other tools such as ITSM (ServiceNow) or CMDB."
"The initial setup can be quite complex at first."
"Lacking more out of the box integrations."
"I would like to see more regular updates released."
"When I am working with my Mac and I right-click to copy and paste, it doesn't work."
"The UI UX of the tool is not really user-friendly and needs to be completely reformed."
"For the next releases, I would like to have them import requirements from other sources. They could make it very easy to do that because there are a lot requirements management tools like DOORS, D-O-O-R-S, Dynamic Object Oriented Management. A lot of folks use DOORS to create a requirement. For those requirements you allocate them to a component in the architecture and a verification method for that requirement. It would be good if we could import those into MagicDraw as components so you don't have to manually do these things."
"The licenses are expensive compared to similar tools. At the moment, the user is open to using MagicDraw if it's 15% more than other solutions. If it were to cost any more, they wouldn't use it."
"The documentation for MagicDraw and the video tutorials compared to other competitors is an area for improvement."
"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."
"The cost of upgrading the product should be lower."
"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."
MEGA HOPEX is ranked 11th in Business Process Design with 10 reviews while No Magic MagicDraw is ranked 10th in Business Process Design with 8 reviews. MEGA HOPEX is rated 7.8, while No Magic MagicDraw is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of MEGA HOPEX writes "Excellent support experience that is local to South America and is easy to expand". On the other hand, the top reviewer of No Magic MagicDraw writes "I like the simulation part, so you can simulate your model to validate it". MEGA HOPEX is most compared with ARIS BPA, Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect, LeanIX and Visio, whereas No Magic MagicDraw is most compared with Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect, Visio, Visual Paradigm, erwin Data Modeler (DM) and Camunda Platform. See our MEGA HOPEX vs. No Magic MagicDraw 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.
