Visual Paradigm pros and cons

The most valuable feature of the Visual Paradigm that I use is process modeling. Additionally, the solution has a complete set of features.

What I found most valuable in Visual Paradigm is diagramming. I had a great user experience as diagramming in the tool is easy and convenient, even for complex diagrams or models. Visual Paradigm is the perfect tool for me, and I prefer it over Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect. Visual Paradigm is better for collaboration if you consider, for example, versioning, so this is another valuable tool feature that's simple and embedded in the solution. In Visual Paradigm, it's also easy to set up the project with team members and collaborate, and it's also a pro of the tool.

Some of the most valuable features of this process modeling tool are process simulation and process animation.

What I like best about Visual Paradigm is its simple GUI, especially since I'm a new user. In my two years of experience with this tool, I didn't find it complex because I was able to learn how to use it via YouTube videos. Visual Paradigm is enough for me. I also find the bridging feature in the tool valuable.

Stable design software with multiple functions and features. It's simple to install and easy to use.

The most valuable feature of Visual Paradigm is the ability to design form flows, add libraries, create organizational charts, and connect them all together.

The initial setup is extremely straightforward.

It is a scalable solution...The initial setup was straightforward.

I like the structure. I can see the diagrams and everything I created.

The Visual Paradigm business process forms for designing we good. There was not a lot of configuration for the process diagram.

Visual Paradigm could improve many aspects. The performance could be better because it can be low. When we have large and complicated models, it has a low speed and many bugs. Sometimes the solution stops and you have to restart Microsoft Windows on your PC. The larger database modeling cannot be done properly, I have to use another solution called SAP PowerDesigner.

In terms of room for improvement in Visual Paradigm, I tried looking for one. I'm pleased with the tool, but it would be great if you could integrate Visual Paradigm with more tools. For example, when moving from Visual Paradigm to another tool, such as Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect, the process could be improved a bit. Still, I wonder if it's not limited by the standards Visual Paradigm follows, such as XMI files. It could be connected to limitations related to the standards rather than a tool limitation. When you move projects from Visual Paradigm into Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect via XMI files, you lose all your notes from the elements, so this is an area for improvement in Visual Paradigm. TOGAF support is an additional feature I'd like to see in the next release of Visual Paradigm. I'd also like the tool to have ArchiMate support. If both TOGAF and ArchiMate could be supported in Visual Paradigm and made part of a lower level of licensing or cheaper licensing models, that would be best for me.

It's still early for me to comment since I've only been using it for two months, but the responsiveness when diagramming needs to be improved.

For me, what needs improvement in Visual Paradigm is the limited features included in the $99 license, which is the cheapest option. If more features could be included in the cheapest licensing package, Visual Paradigm would be better, especially for businesses that have a limited budget for buying software.

Visual Paradigm is heavier and has more complexity than one of its competitors, e.g. Lucidchart. It could have been better if it was more simplified.

Visual Paradigm can improve by having better process mining tools and model integration.

The solution can improve by updating the user interface, and graphics.

The user interface is not easy to navigate, so it should be made easier.

More flexibility when choosing the type of diagram would be nice.

I was looking to generate code from the diagrams, but it was not totally clear how to do it.