Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect Reviews

The business process management of Sparx is valuable.

We've improved overall to some extent due to Sparx.

UML analysis needs to improved.

We've been using it for three years.

There's a lack of diagrams available during deployment.

We had no issues with the stability.

We have been able to scale it to our needs.

We haven't had to contact tech support.

We previously used MAP.

It was straightforward.

We used a vendor team.

Development for simplifications, host tutorial and case studies.

• Teamwork support
• Price policy
• Support of many modelling languages
• Documentation generation incorporation

From the island of non managed analysis and design information to shared repositories with templates. It has helped us with real MDA and code generation directly into Visual Studio.

• A service over repository is more then needed. At least a read only service for JSON or SOAP endpoints
• To be able access models or element from custom apps or scripts on the server side
• The web interface which can show project tree with the model should be better

We've been using it for at least eight years, since v7.

We've had no deployment issues.

MS Office integration works only with local .eap repository files, not with our Postgres repository. Half a year ago they promised to fix this bug, but still no improvement.

We've had no issues scaling it to our needs.

It's sufficient.

It's sufficient.

Rational - no DB repository and it needed to be merged among the team members as XML files via external versioning system. Documentation, requirements, development all needed to be bought as separate tools which was too expensive. It crashes when a project (repo in files) is really big. There's no possibility to merge in real time and this can last hours, and often crashes.

It was straightforward.

We did it in-house.

It's sufficient, nothing to change with the pricing.

• It's generic-ness as you can batch edit objects
• Connectivity to all kinds of office documents because you can reuse your consisting work and link external documents
• Detection of requirement holes because large projects tend to be planned badly
• Completeness as because we do not need to use other tools

It improved our requirements by closing holes. It also, provided visualization features to translate requirements to a non technical language.

Personally, I had a hard time of learning how business modeling works, and simultaneously learning a new tool. I would like beginners tips, pointing you to important features and navigating you around common pitfalls.

We used the trial version for 30 days.

We did not use the deployment feature.

The program did not crash once. There was one issue while batch editing objects.

We had no issues scaling it to our needs.

We reported one problem but never received an answer.

The setup was straightforward.

I did it myself.

We have a positive ROI and will probably be buying it.

We are still in the evaluation phase.

In terms of product features, I'm very happy with the support for UML 2 diagrams, Archimate, TOGAF and the collaboration capability using a RDBMS back-end. Because EA supports multiple models, the whole architecture team can collaborate using the same tool and develop our models from requirements to deployment on a shared repository.

The user interface could be more intuitive and support for a Mac, iOS or at least a browser version would be very welcomed.

I've been using Sparx EA for the last five years.

I did not take part of the deployment but I am also not aware of any significant challenges.

I've had some issues when using a NFS backed but it was on an older version of the product.

We've had no issues scaling it, but I need to caveat that I've only experienced working with teams of up to 10 colleagues.

I've never had the need to contact them directly.

I've never had the need to contact them directly.

I've used MS Visio before, but the tools are not really comparable.

I did not take part of the deployment but I am also not aware of any significant challenges

The deployment and implementation was done by internal IT.

It's hard to calculate the ROI on a product that is used within a function that is a cost center, but it's fairly easy to acknowledge that EA has paid itsef many times over in terms of hours saved for the team.

The setup consists of a team license hosted on a network share and a RDBMS back-end. EA is installed locally on the desktops of the users.

It's a very decent product, but if all you are required to do is produce "box diagrams" then Sparx EA will be overkill.

• ArchiMate - motivational modeling for requirements management
• ArchiMate - business modeling
• Achrimate - information system modelling
• UML - data modeling and use case modelling
• BPMN - business process modelling

It is now based on business drivers, goals and requirements, and linked to business and IT functions. This results in traceability and alignment with business objectives.

• Modeling could be more user-friendly
• ArchiMate - support for derived relations
• Define features and attributes as separate components
• More flexible document generation features

I've used it for around four years.

No issues encountered.

Not in the more recent versions.

No issues encountered.

We had no issues and questions were answered satisfactorily.

We had no issues.

Before I used IBM Rational Rose. I switched because of my move from IBM to another employer.

It was straightforward. It was very easy to setup a new repository from scratch. The tool offers sufficient flexibility to alter the structure.

We've done it in-house.

The ROI is hard to express, as it's indirect and hard to quantify the benefits such as quality improvement. Based on personal productivity, the professional edition it has resulted in over an 100% ROI.

It has low license cost in comparison to other tools. The floating user license works fine for us.

Other solutions were exclude based on pricing.

Take into account it as a rather technical oriented product. It lacks a number of EA features such as ERM, PPM, APM etc. However, ArchiMate does provide some functionality in this field.

• Available architecture frameworks
• Ability to generate documentation
• Forward and reverse engineering capabilities
• Extensibility

• Documented operational processes of all business departments using Archimate 2.0 framework
• Able to depict bottleneck areas - risky processes, infrastructure deficiencies, and opportunities to reuse strategic content
• Visualization of the business was a major benefit

• Ease of customization to develop internal frameworks
• Custom templates and diagrams

I've used it over six years.

Multi-user, enterprise model sharing requires some IT help but overall the experience is pretty straight forward and positive.

No, it's a stable and mature product with good online and community support.

Running large and complex models (ours contained thousands of objects) does require a powerful machine with 8+GB of RAM.

I did not need to use the actual customer service as there are a few books published by EA experts, and community answers are available as well.

9/10, as most of the technical issues are quickly resolved.

We switched from Rational Rose due to the extreme affordability of Sparx Enterprise Architect for the capabilities and quality of the solution.

It's very easy and straight forward to setup, and so are the updates.

It was all done in-house.

It's extremely high.

The original setup was about half an hour of my time, and updates are in the 10 minute range. The network repository took a day to establish, configure and start using. Daily costs are negligible.

• Rational Rose
• Eclipse Modeling
• CA Erwin

Buy Peter Doomen's book "Fifty Enterprise Architect Tricks" book, join the Sparx and LinkedIn communities of experts.

1. Modeling to the Open Group’s Archimate specification
2. Model objects stored to a database for analytical purposes
   
3. TOGAF and Zachmann frameworks reinforce method-specific content models, etc.
   

1. Sparx EA is used to capture the current state of technology systems as it pertains to the business infrastructure and application components, and how they combine to support the business needs and goals
2. Similarly, it captures the planned state for projects that are delivering change
3. Similarly, it captures the planned state for projects that are delivering change

1. The product inherently does not support analysis of the models. For example, to determine what business processes will be impacted by work on a specific server requires a person knowledgeable in the notation to manually perform the analysis.
2. Documents generated from the product leave a bit to be desired.
   

Over one year

There are various add-on components depending on what features/version you buy. Trying to install all products as a non-admin did create challenges. Otherwise, installation with admin privileges was uneventful. Installation of the product’s database schema to the database was simple and the subsequent use of the database as a store for modeling data was easy.

No the product is generally very stable.

No. This product is a desktop tool and generally would not have any scalability issues unless using a centralized service, such as a database server.

No customer service has been needed in the one year of service.

No technical support has been needed in the one year of service.

Other solutions in earlier years. This product was an initial purchase for this need and did not replace any other product within this context.

Installation was straightforward for all components and configurations.

In house implementation.

The nature of this product did not justify an ROI but given a typical fully burdened rate for employee time, the sub-$1000 price tag is quickly recovered.

List price for EA Ultimate Edition was just under $1000/seat perpetual license. Use of a shared Microsoft SQL Server as a repository adds approximately $2.00/day for all EA users based on the company’s negotiated license fee.

Archimate from the Open Group as well as other more robust EA products, both open source and proprietary.

This is really just a modeling tool. Despite its name it does not really compare to to other “enterprise architecture” tools from companies such as Orbus, and Troux. That said the product offers full development life-cycle modelling in addition to some project management tie-ins.

The UML modeling, Use Case Modeling, ability to import custom graphics and map to UML objects, document templates and generation. I would rate the solution as 9/10 as a "project team UML documentation" platform.

5/10 as an "Enterprise Architecture" requirements platform. Mainly as it lacks the ability (or I lack knowing how to) lock specific objects to specific uses.

UML Use Case modeling with complete requirement statement generation.

I would rate EA as a 5/10 as an "Enterprise Architecture" requirements platform. Mainly as it lacks the ability to lock specific objects, object types to specific users or user groups.

I have used it for over eight years.

No. Have deployed in both standalone and team/shared repository environments.

No, the product is very stable.

No. We scaled to a team of about 8 people with no issues using SQL Server as the repository.

I never interacted with Customer Service.. So that speaks to stability and usability.

I never interacted with Technical Support. So that speaks to stability and usability.

Yes, we used Rational Rose and we switched because of cost of prior solution.

Very straight forward.

In house - we have deployed this platform for numerous IT and Business Process teams.

Ensure you have fully reviewed your documentation patterns with the entire team.