The application diagram still doesn't update smoothly. We often have to spend considerable time manually updating them. Ideally, I would like to see a feature where information text, so it could be automatically updated in the data without needing manual intervention.

I think the digital transformation process needs to be reworked. It should allow users to see and account for this movement from the beginning and start with best practices. 

Another thing is that I believe this digital transformation should be reworked. This would allow users to see and consider this movement from the very beginning and implement it and start as a best practice. And, with use cases to help customers see the value of the digital transformation movement.

MegaHOPEX lacks comprehensive features that a governance tool should have, particularly in data governance. 

Furthermore, I have doubts about how risk management and other modules are connected to work together efficiently.

In my experience, I've encountered difficulties with consuming custom packages in MEGA HOPEX, which leads to redundant work when deploying them to production. This is an area where improvement is needed. While version six offers better UI and UX, resolving this issue should be a priority. I believe it's important to fully explore MEGA HOPEX's capabilities before suggesting new ones.

People should have more training about the product. It's a very versatile product. It can be complicated for an average user to use. People with several years of experience working with these tools know how to navigate it. However, it can be overwhelming for a new user.

The training materials and learning process need improvement. The product is quite robust. There is no fault related to internal functions and capabilities.

The solution needs a clearer licensing model and a transparent method to understand where the licenses are held. Licenses are initially assigned to to people, making tracing difficult. If you require 50 concurrent users across an organization of 1000, you need to pinpoint and maintain who uses them. It becomes very challenging without that internal capability.

The product must improve integration with other tools.

The interface must be improved. The tool is not user-friendly. We have to do a lot of workarounds to get a benefit out of it.

The tool needs to have a viewer portal. Currently, we have to use a custom solution to display information, which requires additional effort and tracking of data on a daily basis. Having a built-in viewer dashboard portal would be beneficial.

We don’t have any issues with the solution as it is right now. It offers all the functionalities one would expect.

The initial setup is a little complex.

It takes a long time to learn how to use HOPEX. It's hard to work with it because the user interface is bad. For example, if you want to build a complex system diagram, you need a lot of knowledge to do this correctly and make it readable. In MEGA, you need to create a report and it takes a long time to publish it. The publishing is offline. With RDoC, everything is online.

I cannot recall coming across any missing features.

An area for improvement in MEGA HOPEX is its vast learning curve. The tool is also heavy, so that's a pain point. MEGA HOPEX is also tricky to use if you don't train for many hours.

As a holistic tool, it's supposed to do everything, so everything's connected. For example, your application is connected to data, so your screen is full of information, which works when you have many people working on your information system using MEGA HOPEX. For example, my customer that works with nuclear plants is a big organization. However, the tool would be too complex for a functional organization or a small organization such as in the HR or Financial niche because not as many people work on the information system and the tool.

"HOPEX" in MEGA HOPEX stands for Holistic Platform of Excellence, so you can do everything and describe everything, but the tool is too complex for small business users.

I also found the modeling tool of ARIS better than the modeling tool of MEGA HOPEX.

I rate the tool six on a scale of one to ten because of its complexity.

There is still room for improvement in MEGA HOPEX in my field of work. Some aspects are not working efficiently.

The solution lacks additional models compared to other tools.

We need better traceability available. We want to have traceability between the business and the technology.

The initial setup can be quite complex at first.

The resolution needs to offer more potential for collaboration. Right now, it is much more geared towards one person working on the solution.

The tool's UI should be more user-friendly. 

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.

Of course, there is always room for improvement. There should be an integration with the Microsoft Office platform, for instance. I can compare it to a tool like Orbus. In Orbus, there is already an integration with Microsoft. So, if I already have network diagrams already built in a Microsoft solution, I can bring it into Orbus. I can actually pull a number of the building blocks. I can map parts of the diagrams into the inventory. That is a very, very good feature. 

MEGA HOPEX could also definitely have a lower price. 

I can't speak to which features are missing. I don't have any information on that and don't really have any input.

The solution is quite expensive.

The user interface for the version that we are using is not modern.

This is a complex product. For me, all of the functionality in this product exists, but it is not well explained. Better documentation and training would be helpful.

It was very difficult to adapt MEGA to our way of working. You have to spend 40% of the time thinking about how you will implement and use the MEGA concept.

This is a good product with many features and this can make it easy to get lost in what to use. A more friendly user manual would be good. 

It would be great if this solution could integrate with other tools such as ITSM (ServiceNow) or CMDB.

This product is expensive and would be improved by lowering its price.

There is always room for improvement. Of course, if they could reduce the price it would be more helpful for selling or buying it. They could also perhaps include more out of the box integrations. 

I would like to see more regular updates released.

The deployment should be made easier.

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.

The support service form MEGA is quite good, but it could be better regarding the EA system competition is getting tougher. I feel that there isn't enough time spent on conservation or knowledge sharing with the MEGA support team. The extensive knowledge sharing is needed, due to MEGA HOPEX has a comprehensive but also complex practical framework. I feels very often struggle to figure out the capabilities of MEGA HOPEX, especially how to maximize the utility of the system.

The tool usability is weak and it also has a high learning curve.

The solution is really expensive. I sent this same feedback six months ago. I told them they have a lot of opportunities in the Middle East to fill the small and medium businesses niche, even using the cloud. But, the product is very, very costly. 

They do tend to push people to their professional services, instead of helping the customers with their problems. I understand this is their business. At the same time, however, they need to work on fact sheets or offer some program to help the customers who want to implement it themselves and to make it run properly in their environment. The company seems only interested in selling and not customer satisfaction. I'm not asking for anything for free, I'm just asking them to invest a bit in helping their customers implement their technology correctly.

The documentation needs to be more clearly explained. The documentation gives the customers an indication that everything is available, but when they buy the module, they discover that the pieces that they are looking for are not available in the current module, or that they are available in a different module. Then, the user needs to buy a different module or use professional services even though they thought these items were included. It's confusing.

We use this solution for modeling and we do not have an application side to create forms and deploy applications. It would be helpful if we could use this solution to model an application and then deploy it.

If would be better for us if there was a cloud version of this solution available. 

Continuous integration and DevOps is not yet handled by this solution.

We would like to see integration with other products, such as being able to use our workflow with SharePoint and Microsoft Office.

• Friendlier import/export to other modeling tools.
• Better interaction with project portfolio management tools.

Standardization is lacking. The Operational Risk Function will be more effective if it at a default level follows established Basel standards for Loss categorization, Risk Assessments, Risk Event categorization, etc.  

It's very prescriptive right now as to a particular diagram, what objects you can put on that diagram, and sometimes if you're working with the business you might want to just sketch something out rather than have those limitations.. When you diagram, it's going to take the things that you put on the diagram and link them together. We would like to have the ability to do some sort of a sketching type diagram, where you don't necessarily have to make all those connections. Where you can just put objects on the diagram, maybe turn off something that requires connections to be made, and allows you to just talk to the business and let them guide a conversation and you can build a picture that means something to the business. This diagram could possibly change over time into a diagram with connections.

One of the issues that we've had - we know what we want to do but we don't necessarily know which diagram we can use to do it. Because Mega is so vast, and it has a lot of different diagram types, you might start to use a diagram but it won't let you add a particular object that you need. Just in the last couple of months, someone gave me a query I can use to say, "I want to make a diagram with these three objects on it, which diagrams let me do that?" But if I didn't have that query, it's kind of hunt and peck.

 I would say the other big issue is documentation. Mega needs better documentation. I have had the experience where I can see an object, and I'll look it up in the index to get more information about it, and it won't be there.

The process side love the tool. It helps them to build their current operating model and also to get to the target operating model. That has been helpful and successful. We're still struggling with challenges on the application and technology / data architecture side. That is one area where we would say there is room for improvement. Data architects certainly don't see the tool being their first choice

In terms of features that are available, data architecture, pretty much like the big data and other unstructured content coming in, or for that matter Cloud. Cloud has been around for some time. Definitely if the tool provides more out-of-the-box features, they'll be helpful. My team is responsible for promoting this tool within the enterprise, so we're actually acting as a vendor for our own consumers. We don't control the features of the product, therefore we have to rely on the vendor to provide all these features. All we can do is provide guidance. One thing certainly would help, if the industry is already going towards Cloud computing and big data, why is the product lagging behind in terms of those features? We lose out on time to market.

Let's say I want to create a visualization or I want to bring my own portal page. I have to rely on the vendor to do that. That takes away my time to market. I have all these parts that I want to present, but if it is more than 3 or 4 clicks, that's it, I lose the audience right away. If there is a way for us to accelerate and create a user profile-based user interface, like each role would have its own template. They only get to see the relevant details, and I don't have to rely on the vendor to configure and make that available to my customers. That would definitely help me.

We've asked the vendor for a number of enhancements to mature the tool. One of those specifically, is a service based interface. Both for feeding data into the tool, and retrieving data from the tool, so that other vendor solutions can interact with the tool as a service based model.

The other is to improve the overall operational resiliency. We would ask the vendor to add, and they have actually built it into the tool already, but really allow us to have probe points, so we can measure the various aspects of the automated operational monitoring tool, so we can detect any type of performance degradation, or outage, so it can take automated corrective action. What we want to do is move forward the platform for the self healing model, where the platform doesn't need human intervention for an underlying infrastructure issue.

The ability for us to detect specific infrastructure issues with the tool are not as mature as we would like it. What we want is a more granular ability to probe where there might be an infrastructure issue affecting the tool, either from a performance or variability perspective.

I think it has a lot to offer, but we have been focusing in on ITPM. I think we ourselves need to do a little bit more exploration of how we can benefit from some of the other modules.

Something that might be helpful is to have a little bit more of a curriculum-based engagement of MEGA where we are actually educated more on the bigger picture, not just the tool, but really what is the big picture that MEGA is trying to solve. What are the different pieces and how they fit together? I think that will help expose the power of MEGA to us to see how we can actually use it better. Kind of the Art of the Possible type of positioning.

From the capabilities perspective, the user experience is not the best. It needs to be a lot more easy to use, more intuitive.

It could also drive adoption. We are a pretty large organization with a lot of application and it's not all architects that are using this tool. There are people that are in peripheral organizations that we rely on to provide information and the user interface really needs to be simple and clean and be able to move from task to task very efficiently. The feedback we have gotten so far has not been that. It's been, it's hard to navigate. It's not intuitive. It takes time to do multiple updates in a sitting.

What that means today is that people export data out of MEGA, manage an Excel spreadsheet and then do vault uploads and it kind of defeats the purpose of having a tool like this.

Stability is definitely a critical thing.

Organizations can not afford to have to be rebooting production systems to add a user or to reset a users session. It needs to be more self-healing.

The intuitiveness of the interface.

The ability for the tool to guide a user through a process to ensure architectural changes are made based on knowledge of modeling and business rules, especially where they are complex is very critical to ensuring an manageable architecture. This is especially true when an organization does not have individuals with a deep knowledge of the tool.

The most important thing to be improved is the reliability. Mega should pay more attention because from time to time, the screen freezes or the application stops working without saving the work.

We would like the reporting and analytics, road mapping, import/export functionality, and data modelling capabilities to be improved.

There could be continuous AI enhancements for the platform.