The repository of duplicate objects is bad. There is a function to identify duplicate objects, but if you don't recognize that they are duplicates, it becomes a problem. Also, the repository is not easy to handle it because it just shows you a list of objects in the scroll books. For example, if you have 2000 applications, it is not really feasible to scroll 2000 objects. Thirdly, the query engine is very awkward. If you want to use queries to define viewpoints in anything, the queries are very cryptic. It takes you a really long time to get to it. It does, however, have a query feature but the query only works on objects and not on relationships. It can show you where the objects with the match are, but it doesn't allow you to search, for example, on relationships that way. What's more, Enterprise repository doesn't allow you to store documents. I thought we were able to store documents, like Office documents for example, and that one would be able to open them from there. But this flexibility is not offered. You often get error messages so perhaps the developers can improve their product by using customer feedback because I think that's important.
Owner at a tech services company with 1-10 employees
Real User
Aug 8, 2019
We had a lot of problems with BiZZdesign, and I was happy when we switched to another tool. At first, we used the file server for sharing models, which didn't work because it freezes BiZZdesign. We switched to a database while still in a pilot project. Even then, we found that a lot of the functions were grayed out and unavailable for unknown reasons. We tested it, and we had support from BiZZdesign, including patches, but it just didn't do what we wanted. It was too frustrating. I know that in the meantime there has been a new version and that they have improved, but I never gave it a try because it was too frustrating. The user interface is in particular need of improvement. Every supplier of these tools knows how to make systems to let users model architecture, maintain relationships, and stuff like that. But, the user experience is of the main importance. You want to model quickly, and usually, you want to model in a team and to collaborate on the same model, and this is where I think BiZZdesign could improve. Technical support for this solution can be improved. This solution would benefit from the inclusion of support for different models, beyond ArchiMate-based and architectural, for other kinds of users. This might include strategy or business-wise modeling.
The user interface and connectivity could use further improvement. The interface could be more user-friendly and intuitive. There was a big step between version 3 and version 4. I still have to learn how to use a lot of functions in version 4. I'm looking for further adjustment or adaptation to Windows style because for me it's a little difficult to switch the experience between both tools. I guess that the tool is adapting and converting to Windows step by step. It should be more open to integrating with other existing tools. Although there has been progress in the past. Some of my clients need a translation of the menu into Eastern and Central Europe languages, but EA professionals are able to work in English, so it's not critical.
BiZZdesign HoriZZon offers robust enterprise architecture modeling, seamless collaboration, and supports ArchiMate standards, benefiting organizations with efficient integration capabilities, intuitive features, and stakeholder accessibility.BiZZdesign HoriZZon facilitates enterprise architecture through its strong modeling features in Enterprise Studio, providing collaborative dashboards and integration with systems like ServiceNow and SQL databases. Known for quick loading times and...
It lacks capabilities with regard to infrastructure modeling.
The repository of duplicate objects is bad. There is a function to identify duplicate objects, but if you don't recognize that they are duplicates, it becomes a problem. Also, the repository is not easy to handle it because it just shows you a list of objects in the scroll books. For example, if you have 2000 applications, it is not really feasible to scroll 2000 objects. Thirdly, the query engine is very awkward. If you want to use queries to define viewpoints in anything, the queries are very cryptic. It takes you a really long time to get to it. It does, however, have a query feature but the query only works on objects and not on relationships. It can show you where the objects with the match are, but it doesn't allow you to search, for example, on relationships that way. What's more, Enterprise repository doesn't allow you to store documents. I thought we were able to store documents, like Office documents for example, and that one would be able to open them from there. But this flexibility is not offered. You often get error messages so perhaps the developers can improve their product by using customer feedback because I think that's important.
We had a lot of problems with BiZZdesign, and I was happy when we switched to another tool. At first, we used the file server for sharing models, which didn't work because it freezes BiZZdesign. We switched to a database while still in a pilot project. Even then, we found that a lot of the functions were grayed out and unavailable for unknown reasons. We tested it, and we had support from BiZZdesign, including patches, but it just didn't do what we wanted. It was too frustrating. I know that in the meantime there has been a new version and that they have improved, but I never gave it a try because it was too frustrating. The user interface is in particular need of improvement. Every supplier of these tools knows how to make systems to let users model architecture, maintain relationships, and stuff like that. But, the user experience is of the main importance. You want to model quickly, and usually, you want to model in a team and to collaborate on the same model, and this is where I think BiZZdesign could improve. Technical support for this solution can be improved. This solution would benefit from the inclusion of support for different models, beyond ArchiMate-based and architectural, for other kinds of users. This might include strategy or business-wise modeling.
The user interface and connectivity could use further improvement. The interface could be more user-friendly and intuitive. There was a big step between version 3 and version 4. I still have to learn how to use a lot of functions in version 4. I'm looking for further adjustment or adaptation to Windows style because for me it's a little difficult to switch the experience between both tools. I guess that the tool is adapting and converting to Windows step by step. It should be more open to integrating with other existing tools. Although there has been progress in the past. Some of my clients need a translation of the menu into Eastern and Central Europe languages, but EA professionals are able to work in English, so it's not critical.