Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect Reviews

We use it for modeling and for making strategy.

Sparx offers good flexibility. 

The documentation could be better. Where I work, we speak French and we don't speak English, so we don't have anything in French. It's perfect in English, but we need something in French.

I have been using Sparx for 11 years. 

Stability is not perfect. When you are working with your notebook after 10 minutes that you don't touch your keyboard we see some stability problems with the system. It blocks it. They have to improve this. 

We have 100 tests. We have one company that represents Sparx here in Canada. They work with us and also give us technical support.

It's easy to scale because we integrated with Jira. It was very quick to start our work. It's very easy. It's good.

Their support is perfect. They are quick and courteous. 

We use Bonita, Lucidchart and erwin.

We had three months to compare and after that, we concluded that Bonita was very difficult to use for beginners. You have to have the experience, it's not easy for someone starting their career.

Sparx is more complex but in terms of functionality, it is easier to use. 

The initial setup is okay.

My advice would be to do a lot of training beforehand. We have invested a lot of money in terms of training because we didn't do it before, so it's a little bit difficult. 

In the next release, I would like to see more integration with other tools like Microsoft Azure. That's really important to us. 

I would rate it a nine out of ten.

We use the Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect to guide the enterprise data model used for documentation.

The most valuable feature of Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is the value streams.

I have been using Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect for approximately three years.

Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is stable.

I rate the scalability of Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect a four out of five.

We have approximately 60 people in my organization using this solution.

I rate the technical support of Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect a four out of five.

The initial setup of the Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect It's very complicated. It's very difficult to start with the right templates because there are many possibilities. The deployment took approximately two days.

I would rate the ease of implementation of Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect one out of five.

I did the implementation of Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect myself. It's a long whole process to activate it and to be on the right path. It takes a lot of communication with the technical team.

There is no license required for this solution.

My advice to others is to get off to the right start by choosing the correct template. That's very important, otherwise, you will be lost.

I rate Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect a nine out of ten.

We use this solution for our enterprise architecture and all forms of data modeling using UML.

Within our company, there are roughly 25 employees using this solution. 

We use this solution a lot. In fact, we plan on using it to cover all of our enterprise architecture-related tasks.

This solution provides us with good integration between different notations. It also features good reporting facilities coupled with a concrete database.

This solution is quite complex to use. It would be nice if the learning curve wasn't so steep. 

I can't think of any additional features that I would like to see in the next release. There are already plenty; if there were any more, it would only become harder to use. 

I have been using Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect for the past 10 years. 

This solution is quite stable. 

I haven't had to contact technical support. 

The initial setup isn't easy, but it's not hard either — it's in between. 

I think our license costs roughly $1,000 a year, but I could be wrong. 

I would recommend this solution to others. Just make sure to hire an expert to get you started. 

Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of eight. 

We started to build an architecture based on this tool.

We use if for enterprise architecture with multiple domains.

The most valuable feature is that it provides tuning for multiple layers of enterprise in the business application architecture. 

We can use the same tool for a different audience. It helps our enterprise architects in building their diagrams. It helps with the handling of the application architect when it comes to the development team.

It provides good utilization and it's a convenient tool for building exact architectural work.

One of the drawbacks is that it is oriented on architecture and not user-presented.

Also, one of the disadvantages is that it doesn't provide a better representation level for the readers. It is not integrated with solutions such as Confluence or Jira. This is something that is missing in this solution.

Because it is oriented on architecture, it is not convenient to use this information for the presentations to our clients.

They also have a cloud-based deployment solution and it has a bit more capability to communicate to clients and to the sales team.

I would like to see integration with Confluence or any other TRM, and the capability to integrate with the data storage, such as a repository similar to GitHub.

We have been using Sparx System Enterprise Architect for approximately 10 years.

We are using version 14 or 15.

It is difficult for us to judge the stability because it is open for us in Europe and spread between two cities, Paris and Amsterdam.

We don't have a strong demand to have a highly scalable solution for building enterprise-related activities.

We have 50 users in our organization who are using this solution.

We may be increasing our usage, as we have had many acquisitions and have more people than we need.

We are not acquainted with any other solution.

If you are talking about Enterprise Architects, the initial setup is quite simple.

We want to keep all of the information inside our own infrastructure. We have our own data centers and for now, we would like for it not to go into cloud deployment.

We had help from the vendor for the implementation.

Pricing is open information.

They have the price on their site for the enterprise version, and we do receive a small discount.

We are doing some slow research in the direction of switching to another program. For this year, it's not in the roadmap, but I will approve that for next year because we really want to consider some alternatives.

For example, solutions like LeanIX have more capabilities for integration between different levels of data representation. We can integrate the system with Confluence, and it can integrate with Jira.

We have been quite happy for a number of years, but it has several drawbacks. We are considering an alternative. We are not looking to get rid of this solution but use another product and use them both for a while.

I would rate Sparx System Enterprise Architects a seven out of ten.

When I'm developing some of my applications, I collect the requirements from the customer and understand the workflows for different scenarios. I then model the workflows as the point of reference for the development team.

It allows some kind of reverse engineering, where if you have a database or some different languages, you can reverse engineer and get the diagrams, which is very helpful.

The Business Process Modeling or BPM part is the most valuable. Its ability to simulate scenarios is also very useful.

It can also create descriptions of the workflows. It has a feature in which if you create some BPMN process, a workflow diagram, and the description inside, you can actually simulate the whole scenario, and you get the description. That's very handy.

The Business Process Modeling or BPM feature can be improved to make it more interactive and user friendly because it is a tool for technical people. My current use is only for business process modeling notation and putting in the icons etc. You need to take them in as a class, which makes things very complex. Because of this complexity, it is not an easy-to-handle solution.

Enterprise Architect is not very good for mockups. We cannot create user screens and other similar kinds of stuff, which is bad. For these things, we prefer to use Axure RP and other similar solutions. They should either remove this feature from this product or provide some kind of connectivity with Axure RP so that people can do better mockups of screens and import them.

They need to augment and strengthen the BPM feature, which is the main feature. They need to put in some elements like artificial intelligence and augmented reality. They should look into such features because these things are coming up.

I started using this solution in 2003 when it was version two.

It is quite stable.

It is quite scalable. I didn't have any need to involve 30 or 40 technical business analysts or users. We had just a few users because it is used during the business analysis and design phase. Every team can use its own installation.

It is hard to access those people. You can get in touch only through email. The same problem is there with Visual Paradigm. They are also accessible only through email. I would rate their support a five out of ten.

There were two products, which were very popular initially. One was STP that was developed by people who started the object paradigm and human modeling. Rational Rose was the other one, which was taken away by IBM, and it was lost. After that, many other tools appeared.

The initial setup is straightforward. It is very easy to install.

It is really good if you want to develop workflows. It is not good for data modeling. For data modeling, Visual Paradigm is better.

I would rate Enterprise Architect a seven out of ten.

I use it to demonstrate Business Process Modeling Notation (BPMN) and architecture repository. I also demonstrate the document generation facility of the tool. It has got a plugin named BRC, binary enterprise architecture system integration, and I use that to show to my participants' diagram-driven architecture, gap analysis using diagrams, work package creations, and architecture roadmap creation. 

It is a desktop solution. I have purchased the desktop version.

I like it because it is very economical. Price-wise, Sparx EA is very low cost. 

It is easy to use. Connecting entities is very easy in this.

It is an EA tool that is approved by Open Group. It is in the tool register of Open Group. 

Their technical support is not good in India. I wrote to them because I had a question, but I never got an answer. So, I just left it behind.

I've been using this solution for the last three years for my class.

It is stable.

I have not used it for large projects, but I have asked Sparx people whether it can have multi-faring and configuration management, and they said yes. 

I am the main trainer of my organization, and I am the only one who is using it.

Their technical support is not good in India. It could be better. I wrote an email to the support, but I didn't get a response. I did not call them and pursue it too much because my need was not professional. My need was more education-based. It is good for my use, and I'm able to fill the time in my class with topics. 

It is easy to install. You just execute an MSF file, and it is implemented quickly. It took a maximum of three minutes.

I did it myself. I did not take the help of any technical team of Sparx EA.

It is very economical and low cost. You have to pay for a one-time license, and it is active forever.

I would recommend this solution. I would rate it a six out of 10.

Our primary use case is as a UML tool, a diagramming tool that also enables you to build an inventory of different objects and different entities. We are a customer of Sparx and I am an enterprise architect.

The most valuable feature is the ability to keep an inventory of reusable blocks, and use them in different diagrams with views of various templates that are also available. It also has the ability to work as an add-on with Zachman Framework and a variety of other frameworks adapted to this product. It's a good UML tool. 

I think the solution could be improved visually. It's not as visually appealing as other solutions. There is a difference between being focused on a technical audience or a business audience. A business audience requires a greater effort and good visuals. Integrations with SharePoint, for example, could be beneficial. If you are using on-premise installation, the sharing of your artifacts with people that don't have a license, can be somewhat complicated.

I've been using this solution for eight years. 

This is a stable solution. 

This solution is scalable.

The initial setup is straightforward and it's a simple implementation. 

Although we use an on-prem version, they've now moved over to cloud so the sharing is much easier and has improved the solution overall. 

I would rate this solution a nine out of 10. 

Creating diagrams and sets of reusable artifacts using UML, Arhimate and other notations.

Using diagrams and artifacts to generate documentation.

We adopted Sparx EA more than six years ago. Before that, all models were created in MS Visio and were maintained independently without any tractability. That led to insufficient incomplete impact analysis and incomplete solutions. With Sparx EA, models became a maintainable and reusable asset of the corporation. Correct impact analysis became a matter of minutes. As a result the quality of solutions drastically improved. Not mentioning that all employees in any department can now clearly understand business processes with all related applications and infrastructure at any level.

• Great adaptability to modeling needs of all organization departments: Business, Architecture, Software Development, and Systems Support.
• Kind of all-in-one solution (in a good meaning of it), through support for many standard modeling notations used in most of domains of the IT/IS. The list of supported notation grows constantly.
• Effective for Enterprise, Solution, and Software architectures.
• Ability to maintain cross-references for all models in all levels - great tractability.
• Versioning for all elements.
• Very attractive pricing and simple licensing model.
• Good set of the add-ons that grow and improve.

The elements of the modeling sets can have better customization and visual representation. It would be great to have a mobile version.

We did not encounter any issues with stability.

With very large projects, the loading time can become a bit longer, although not to the extent of becoming a great concern.

I would rate the level of technical support as "not bad". But I did not need to use technical support too much.

MS Visio was used for tractability and maintenance, and many other concerns, were the reasons that we switched.

The initial setup was very easy. After that, by following the best practices from the Sparx website, it is easy to organize the whole modeling process with versioning. You have the ability to reuse existing elements/projects and create customized project templates.

In my opinion, there is a great ROI on a product like this.

Pricing and licensing is very attractive, simple, and straightforward.

We evaluated other options such as Rational Software Architect, Visual Paradigm, and Altova UModel.

Plan and organize your elements and models using the best practices from the beginning and create customized project templates. That will benefit you greatly afterwards.