We performed a comparison between Sparx Pro Cloud Server and Sparx Systems Enterprise 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 solution's most valuable feature is ArchiMate which I use daily."
"We have found the technical support to be helpful."
"This is a useful tool for IT people who need to design their solution architecture."
"Its ease of use and the breadth of the toolkit are most valuable. It has an incredible repository of artifacts to work with, and they're all cross-referenced. It works with a whole bunch of different standards. It works with BPMN, which is Business Process Modeling Notation, and it also works with something called TOGAF, which is the Open Group Architecture Foundation. There are different layers when you're dealing with architecture. There is the user interface, application, data, data servers, and all that kind of stuff. You have the infrastructure, hardware, and software layers, and then you have the application and business capability layers. You can model a business process and decompose it into all of the applications, data, and hardware to support it."
"The best thing about the tool is that its database is open."
"The most valuable features are the flexibility and adaptability of Sparx Enterprise Architect."
"Simplified our task at maintaining architecture information and traceability with requirements."
"The system provides powerful tools for obtaining reports and documentation."
"It provides good utilization and it's a convenient tool for building exact architectural work."
"Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect was easy to set up and it took just twenty minutes."
"The user-friendliness could be even better."
"The solution should allow easier access with enhanced customization options for web page DHTML."
"The reporting needs improvement."
"The solution needs to offer better support for the mobile-based system. Right now, it's not working."
"The templates for documentation should be enhanced to include complex documents such as template RFP, or Non functional requirements template."
"The modeling tool is targeted toward a sophisticated user."
"The automatic creation of reports based on the model elements could be improved."
"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."
"This solution is quite complex to use. It would be nice if the learning curve wasn't so steep."
"In a future release, they should improve portfolio planning."
More Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect Pricing and Cost Advice →
Sparx Pro Cloud Server is ranked 14th in Enterprise Architecture Management with 3 reviews while Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is ranked 2nd in Enterprise Architecture Management with 97 reviews. Sparx Pro Cloud Server is rated 8.4, while Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Sparx Pro Cloud Server writes "Scalable and reasonably priced with good technical support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect writes "Easy to set up and had no issues with stability, but it's not a very friendly tool, and its database modeling and entity-relationship modeling functions need improvement". Sparx Pro Cloud Server is most compared with SAP PowerDesigner and Sparx Prolaborate, whereas Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is most compared with Visual Paradigm, Visio, No Magic MagicDraw, Lucidchart and LeanIX. See our Sparx Pro Cloud Server vs. Sparx Systems Enterprise 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.