Camunda vs No Magic MagicDraw comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Camunda Logo
10,417 views|6,428 comparisons
88% willing to recommend
Dassault Logo
4,927 views|2,744 comparisons
88% willing to recommend
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Camunda and No Magic MagicDraw based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Business Process Design solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
To learn more, read our detailed Camunda vs. No Magic MagicDraw Report (Updated: May 2024).
770,292 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"For an internal project, this is a solution that you can install and have up and running quite quickly.""We like the idea of working with Cawemo because it enables us to keep on working, remotely or not. It allows us to collaborate between areas. It's easy to model and easy to use""It is an absolutely stable solution.""The number of client implementations and cross-language capabilities to support multiple frameworks is very pluggable compared to Pega. It's also more portable.""I like everything about the entire BPM that comes with the BPM suite.""The most valuable feature of Camunda Platform is its Microservices architecture, which is easily integrable with APIs.""Ease of use and ability to streamline a process model.""We are documenting all of the processors and VPN. Then we are sharing it with our business users."

More Camunda Pros →

"I think one of the key things is the plugins for integration with requirements management tools like Doors""The beauty of MagicDraw is that it has a simulation part, so you can simulate your model to validate it. The simulation allows you to bring in code off of an external code that you can write to set up the simulation and execute the code.""I like the traceability feature. Whoever is working with the product would be sure of the things that could be affected if they decided to affect one of the other companies. For example, let's say that an engineer starts a new project optimization problem by adjusting the thickness of metal sheets. However, the engineers only see a reduced number of affections, but when we use the requirement traceability, they can see the whole picture. That's the main aspect that we were promoting with this tool.""The technical support is very good.""It is pretty easy to use. It is pretty versatile.""The most valuable feature is the ability to quickly build multiple layers within the organizational and business process environments, as well as in the SysML product environments, and converting to files that can be accessed by clients who do not have a system and a teamwork server access.""I would rate MagicDraw a nine out of ten because of the price. Enterprise Architect has a lot of bugs and MagicDraw is a lot more accurate and flexible. It's a level better.""The most valuable feature is the amount of flexibility that one has to model, which is great for an individual."

More No Magic MagicDraw Pros →

Cons
"The initial set up could be simplified, it's complex.""I have faced problems in bringing up the Cockpit in terms of GUI processes. I think that there is room for improvement in those areas.""I would like to see the forms engine available in the open-source version of this solution.""The product's initial setup phase is difficult for beginners.""Lacking in forms visualization.""The business model could be easier to understand.""It lacks some preset features and configurations which would make it more plug-and-play for customers.""Process interfaces between diagrams could be improved."

More Camunda Cons →

"For the next releases, I would like to have them import requirements from other sources. They could make it very easy to do that because there are a lot requirements management tools like DOORS, D-O-O-R-S, Dynamic Object Oriented Management. A lot of folks use DOORS to create a requirement. For those requirements you allocate them to a component in the architecture and a verification method for that requirement. It would be good if we could import those into MagicDraw as components so you don't have to manually do these things.""There could be a trial version for students.""They don't really support code engineering, and that's why we have to move to Enterprise Architect. MagicDraw is stuck at C++03 standards, whereas most C++ programs today want to use the latest definition of the C++ standards. We were at C++11, and we wanted to do code engineering with C++11 or 17, but they didn't support it. That pushed us into a different tool, which is Sparx Enterprise Architect.""It's very focused on specific modern languages and it doesn't do necessarily general systems software engineering with diagrams. They should expand the diagram types for the languages.""There's lots of documentation. They process multiples of guides. They've got all kinds of guides and documentation out there, but it's kind of hard to find. There are a lot of videos. You can go to YouTube and find videos on how it's been used in different ways, but it just kind of scratches the surface.""The price of the solution could be reduced.""When I am working with my Mac and I right-click to copy and paste, it doesn't work.""It would be better if the User Interface were updated. At the moment, it's a classic environment. It reminds me of the old Windows interface, for example, Windows 95. It would be better to make it more user-friendly. It would also be better if it could integrate with SAP solutions. It isn't easy to find experts in the field. It's hard to find people around the globe that have the necessary skills and expertise to manage this solution. For example, in our case, we needed someone with refrigeration knowledge that also knew how to use the tool, and that was a challenge. We also had issues relating to erasing. Sometimes, it kept it in the background and didn't erase it at all. We had to review the entire list to ensure that the item was deleted."

More No Magic MagicDraw Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "It is less cost-prohibitive than other solutions on the market. This solution was in our price range."
  • "We are using the open-source version of this solution."
  • "Camunda is much cheaper."
  • "I use the open-source free version."
  • "The open-source version of the product is free to use."
  • "The cost of this solution is better than some competing products."
  • "Licensing costs are anywhere from $80,000 to $100,000 USD per year."
  • "We use the open-source version, which can be used at no cost."
  • More Camunda Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "In addition to the initial cost, you have to pay annually for support in order to get the upgrades."
  • "I would say licensing would be anywhere from $3,500 to $6,500 per person or per seat (it's a per seat style license)."
  • "The licensing is on a yearly basis, and it's expensive."
  • "The price of No Magic MagicDraw could improve. The price of the solution is too expensive for smaller-sized companies. There should be a better pricing model."
  • "I rate the pricing a ten out of ten. It is an expensive product compared to software for model-based system engineering."
  • More No Magic MagicDraw Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Business Process Design solutions are best for your needs.
    770,292 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:One of the things we like best about Bonita is that you can create without coding - it is a low-code platform. With Bonita, you can build the entire mechanism using the GUI, it’s that simple. You can… more »
    Top Answer:Appian is fast when building simple to medium solutions. This solution offers simple drag-and-drop functionality with easy plug-and-play options. The initial setup was seamless and very easy to… more »
    Top Answer:Camunda Platform allows for visual demonstration and presentation of business process flows. The flexible Java-based option was a big win for us and allows for the integration of microservices very… more »
    Top Answer:There is a lot of documentation available on the Internet to understand its functionality.
    Top Answer:I rate the pricing a ten out of ten. It is an expensive product compared to software for model-based system engineering.
    Top Answer:The product is very expensive. There could be a trial version for students. It will be helpful.
    Ranking
    2nd
    Views
    10,417
    Comparisons
    6,428
    Reviews
    24
    Average Words per Review
    921
    Rating
    8.1
    10th
    Views
    4,927
    Comparisons
    2,744
    Reviews
    6
    Average Words per Review
    347
    Rating
    8.3
    Comparisons
    Apache Airflow logo
    Compared 21% of the time.
    Bizagi logo
    Compared 9% of the time.
    Pega BPM logo
    Compared 9% of the time.
    IBM BPM logo
    Compared 8% of the time.
    Appian logo
    Compared 7% of the time.
    Also Known As
    Camunda BPM
    MagicDraw
    Learn More
    Camunda
    Video Not Available
    Overview

    Camunda enables organizations to orchestrate processes across people, systems, and devices to continuously overcome complexity and increase efficiency. A common visual language enables seamless collaboration between business and IT teams to design, automate, and improve end-to-end processes with the required speed, scale, and resilience to remain competitive. Hundreds of enterprises such as Atlassian, ING, and Vodafone orchestrate business-critical processes with Camunda to accelerate digital transformation. To learn more visit camunda.com.

    No Magic MagicDraw is a versatile solution designed to enable users to work on everything from business processes to architecture or software and system modeling.

    No Magic MagicDraw is an extremely robust solution that is designed for a range of professionals. This product is invaluable to business analysts, software analysts, programmers, QA engineers, and documentation writers. It is a highly dynamic and versatile tool that can aid in the analysis and design of Object Oriented (OO) systems. It maximizes the ability of teams to work in tandem by allowing everyone working on a particular project to automatically gain access to the newest version of the model that they are working on. This way everyone can work on their part of the project without having to worry about updating each part of the project individually.

    Benefits of No Magic MagicDraw

    Some of the benefits of using No Magic MagicDraw include:

    • The ability for users to easily adapt to the overall feel of the solution. Users will easily get used to the layout of No Magic MagicDraw regardless of the field they are coming from. Users also learn how to use No Magic MagicDraw features fairly easily. No Magic MagicDraw implements new features at the request of users. This means that the design of the solution is based on the specific needs of the people who use it. Users can quickly learn how to use the various features as they mirror the specific habits of those who use it.
    • The ability to access and manage models created by the software from anywhere in the world. Anyone who is authorized to work on the models can access them so long as they have an internet connection. Work can be completed at any time and from any place, which will greatly increase corporate productivity.

    Reviews from Real Users

    No Magic MagicDraw stands out among its competitors for a number of reasons. Two major ones are the way that it enables users to efficiently create models and the overall robustness of the solution. Users are given the ability to efficiently and accurately model the requirements of whatever it is that they are creating. No Magic MagicDraw provides users with many valuable features that allow them to maximize what they can do with the solution.

    PeerSpot user Wayne L., a Systems Engineer at SIMTRS, notes the way in which No Magic MagicDraw allows users to create models more efficiently. He writes, “We are getting away from the old ways of writing a lot of papers and requirements documents, architecture documents, technical solution documents, interface documents - those days are gone. MagicDraw allows you to model the requirements, and by doing so, you've got a good chance of not missing any requirements. The old way of doing things was to decompose the requirements into shell statements. But when you model it, you will be able to practically make sure you don't miss anything. MagicDraw has a good modeling tool you use for case diagrams. Its use case diagram is part of the UML and SysML that you can use to model requirements to create an architecture. I've created a lot of architectures for the Army and also mapped those components of the architecture as the test procedures.”

    PeerSpot user Terry J., the president at I2R, Inc., notes the robustness of No Magic MagicDraw when he writes, "When you look at it, No Magic is an all-encompassing tool. You can use it for business architecture design. You can use it for deploying an ERP system across your enterprise. However, it was initially designed and developed for model-based systems engineering. That's the systems engineering required to either produce an IP system or product. It takes away the mounds of paper and puts it into a model. It enables you to generate significant savings by modeling that new product or that system before you ever start developing a prototype."

    Sample Customers
    24 Hour Fitness, Accruent, AT&T Inc., Atlassian, CSS Insurance, Deutsche Telekom, Generali, Provinzial NordWest Insurance Services, Swisscom AG, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, VHV Group, Zalando
    Northrop Grumman, Labcorp, Deposco, ClearView Training, IT Services Promotion Agency, Intelligent Chaos, Metalithic Systems Inc., Sodifrance
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Computer Software Company23%
    Financial Services Firm19%
    Comms Service Provider13%
    Government13%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm26%
    Computer Software Company13%
    Manufacturing Company6%
    Insurance Company6%
    REVIEWERS
    University38%
    Manufacturing Company13%
    Engineering Company13%
    Aerospace/Defense Firm13%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Manufacturing Company17%
    Government15%
    Computer Software Company10%
    Aerospace/Defense Firm9%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business46%
    Midsize Enterprise21%
    Large Enterprise33%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business18%
    Midsize Enterprise12%
    Large Enterprise70%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business65%
    Midsize Enterprise5%
    Large Enterprise30%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business14%
    Midsize Enterprise10%
    Large Enterprise75%
    Buyer's Guide
    Camunda vs. No Magic MagicDraw
    May 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about Camunda vs. No Magic MagicDraw and other solutions. Updated: May 2024.
    770,292 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    Camunda is ranked 2nd in Business Process Design with 69 reviews while No Magic MagicDraw is ranked 10th in Business Process Design with 17 reviews. Camunda is rated 8.2, while No Magic MagicDraw is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Camunda writes "Open-source, easy to define new processes, and easy to transition to new business process definitions". On the other hand, the top reviewer of No Magic MagicDraw writes "Pretty easy to use and versatile, but doesn't support code engineering and can be overly complicated at times". Camunda is most compared with Apache Airflow, Bizagi, Pega BPM, IBM BPM and Appian, whereas No Magic MagicDraw is most compared with Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect, Visio, Visual Paradigm, Lucidchart and MEGA HOPEX. See our Camunda vs. No Magic MagicDraw report.

    See our list of best Business Process Design vendors.

    We monitor all Business Process Design 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.