We performed a comparison between MEGA HOPEX and UNICOM System Architect based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Enterprise Architecture Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable parts of this solution are the richness of its features and its easy interface."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the reuse of common enterprise components and entities."
"This is a complete package with all of the functionality that we need."
"The ability to customize is valuable."
"We use the portfolio management feature heavily."
"It's excellent for supporting decision-making."
"Its availability is very good."
"The support experience in Latin America is great."
"It is useful for creating build-outs and architecture views and for publishing reports and stuff like that for different programs."
"It has good end-to-end metamodel interrelationships."
"Better documentation and training would be helpful."
"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."
"It has a data domain where we load our data objects onto the tool but doesn't provide data governance capabilities such as cleansing or validating data."
"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."
"The product must improve integration with other tools."
"The solution lacks additional models compared to other tools."
"There could be continuous AI enhancements for the platform."
"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."
"They need to add reports that show the enterprise architecture perspectives, and the dashboards should be comfortable for the senior enterprise architects so that they can view the complete landscape."
"I don't use the tool or know a lot. It is going to have some shortcomings. When it comes down to publishing, we just found out this week that they actually have a publisher add-on. So, what we were trying to publish was not giving a detailed report about the architecture, views, etc. I just wish they had sent these to UNICOM and contacted them about add-on features for the publishing part of the tool."
Earn 20 points
MEGA HOPEX is ranked 4th in Enterprise Architecture Management with 37 reviews while UNICOM System Architect is ranked 25th in Enterprise Architecture Management. MEGA HOPEX is rated 7.8, while UNICOM System Architect is rated 6.0. The top reviewer of MEGA HOPEX writes "Interactive with good functionality and helps with productivity". On the other hand, the top reviewer of UNICOM System Architect writes "Useful for creating build-outs and architecture views, but requires a publisher add-on for some detailed reports". MEGA HOPEX is most compared with Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect, LeanIX, ARIS BPA, Visio and Avolution ABACUS, whereas UNICOM System Architect is most compared with Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect and IBM Rational System Architect. See our MEGA HOPEX vs. UNICOM System Architect report.
See our list of best Enterprise Architecture Management vendors.
We monitor all Enterprise Architecture Management reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
