BiZZdesign HoriZZon Reviews

One of the main advantages of this solution is that they have representation in the Open Group Forum, which means that any changes in ArchiMate are immediately implemented in BiZZdesign. The other big advantage is its ability to interweave various modeling languages and provide a seamless view between them that allows one to navigate from one language to the other through the integrated links and cross-model relations.

This tool is something of a beast - it takes a long time to learn, and it isn't possible for casual users and most architects. Unless a person spends 500 or 1,000 hours on the tool or does very concentrated sessions using all its functionalities, it's very difficult to master. Improving the capability of architects to use the tool would be a big improvement. In the next release, I'd like to see better integration with other product companies in this space, like CMDB and ServiceNow, and for BiZZdesign to introduce knowledge-sharing sessions to showcase new best practices, what's being promoted, client success stories etc.

I've been using this solution for the last four-and-a-half years.

This is a fairly stable tool in terms of integrity and performance.

BiZZdesign's technical support could be improved. For example, we have given them access to our environment, but when we log tickets, they're taken by their level-one team and only go to the experts with access to our environment once they progress. It would be better if when we're logging a specific problem in our environment, it could go directly to a person with access, which would propel the turnaround time. 

Implementation was fairly complex because of constraints on resources when it comes to architects. Layers get implemented at various speeds, so there are gaps, which creates problems because the core layers are supposed to be addressed in parallel. The documentation is also not up to standard, and we would expect better support material in general.

The pricing model is slightly on the high side and could be more competitive for long-term partnerships.

I've evaluated ARIS (which has an additional capability of process mining on its BPM layer and the Alfabet to handle enterprise architecture), TransUnion (whose Sparx tools are loose in the standards and haven't had good feedback), and Signavio.

If you're thinking of implementing BiZZdesign, take it from a capability perspective. The first and primary element to be covered is the architecture capability the organization wishes to establish. Then have your use cases defined very clearly and factor in a fair bit of time for implementation to give it time to produce results. I'd rate this solution as seven out of ten.

Our clients deal directly with BiZZdesign. They use it, but what we do is we have some experts who have hands-on experience, and we use that knowledge to implement solutions for them. We don't use any separate licenses for HoriZZon ourselves.

There could definitely be regulatory impacts to comply with industry regulations. 

Since we're currently supporting clients in two specific countries, I'm mostly confident it's compliant. If clients in other countries require it, they'd likely raise questions about regulatory compliance. 

As these clients seem to be familiar with the product, it's currently compliant. 

The features I like are that it's very easy to implement and it's reliable.

This is one of the best tools, especially because of its collaborative nature. Anyone using it can access previous projects and related data. It's definitely a strong collaborative tool.

It's configurable, meaning you can integrate this product with different tools. However, there are some restrictions. 

Integration definitely needs improvement. There are some restrictions. We've seen that it doesn't integrate with everything we might expect.

Out of ten products we want to integrate, maybe five or six integrate easily. The other four might face challenges due to lower investment in the products or compatibility issues. It's definitely not easy to achieve seamless integration for any product.

We can only test to a certain extent, and issues could arise from either BiZZdesign HoriZZon or the other product.

Another point is the cost of licenses. If they were a bit lower, it would be easier for businesses to acquire more licenses... something like an enterprise or bulk license model. Maybe different pricing tiers based on the number of licenses, like significant discounts for orders over one hundred. This could help clients adopt the product.

I have been using it for five to six years now. 

It is a very stable product. We don't have any challenges in this regard. 

I would rate the stability a seven out of ten. 

It is a scalable solution. I would rate the scalability a seven out of ten because it has an autoscaling option. It's generally scalable.

The solutions support medium and enterprise level businesses. 

We struggled once to get adequate support. It took a long time to receive the solution we expected.

Neutral

We don't use this product in isolation. Different clients use different products.

We can recommend the best products for our clients. Some clients may be new to us, or existing clients who already hold BiZZdesign HoriZZon licenses.

I would rate my experience with the initial setup an eight out of ten. The setup process is relatively smooth. 

We've only worked with cloud deployments. I'd also rate the cloud setup experience an eight out of ten. We have instructions, user guides, and support details provided. In case something happens, we have contacts to reach out to. However, we haven't tried on-premises deployments.

The deployment time depends on the complexity of the project. For complex projects, it definitely takes a few weeks. There might be dependent tasks involved. 

However, most deployments happen within minutes if there are no dependencies. If not, it takes a few hours, maybe three to four, based on any related tasks.

We are the implementors. We implement different solutions for our clients. 

In terms of licensing, my clients take care of everything directly with BiZZdesign. We don't intervene in that process. However, we provide advisory services. 

For example, if we determine that additional licenses are needed, we inform the client, and they manage the licensing changes.

In terms of this particular product usage, my clients currently only use per-user licenses.

I would rate the pricing a five out of ten, with ten being expensive. It's not too costly, but not particularly cheap either.

I would recommend using this product. However, it depends on the clients we acquire in the future. Not every client needs this type of software. If we encounter clients who aren't using HoriZZon, or are using a different solution, we might recommend this product if it aligns with their interests. 

We'd need to understand their current setup, costs, stability requirements, and any challenges they're facing before recommending a switch.

Overall, I would rate the solution a seven out of ten. 

This is very good software and very useful. As long as you are intending to do design at a business process level, at application processes levels, or even at data op level.

When you go down to modernizing the architecture of your infrastructure, which is part of my job, it's not at all made for that. They have only covered the eye level part of architecture design in IT, but they have not provided the capabilities to properly do what an organization is designing to do in the future.

It's a good tool. My colleagues that are making use of it for application, business processes, or data modeling, are very satisfied with it. They find it easy to use. The graphical representation is simple but therefore efficient, so I know that they are planning a very good commencement on the use of these tools.

It lacks capabilities with regard to infrastructure modeling.

I have been using BiZZdesign for around two years. 

It's a cloud-based solution but I have not noticed any issue connecting to it, or any problems while using it, and my colleagues have not reported having any kind of issue with it, so I would say that it is pretty stable.

We have five users using this solution. 

It is used on a daily basis.

I haven't needed to contact customer support. 

My advice to someone considering this solution is to follow the training. It's nice to use when you know how to use it. At first, it's good to have some explanations on how it is working. And this information is very important in order to set up your BiZZdesign environments, your libraries, typically, from an architecture standpoint, to make sure that you use it efficiently.

I know that this has been a problem at setup time, so it's not a software installation problem. It is a problem with customization. It's important to have a proper understanding of how BiZZdesign works if you want to make the right first configuration.

In the next release, I would like to see the modernization of the software.

I would rate BiZZdesign an eight out of ten. 

My primary use cases are for consulting on enterprise architecture and support of digital transformation, and I also use BiZZdesign as a tool.

The powerful editing function in teamwork project-based, common or shared modeling, based on a powerful repository and knowledge sharing in a portal are the most valuable features. These are the most important features for me. I can add the integration of individual modeling notations like Archimate plus BPMN and DMN, and so on. We travel from one location to another and the tool allows us to keep track.

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.

It is stable although there have been a few cases where it shut down. But the instances were a lot less than Windows itself. 

Scalability is up to my needs because I model just a few thousands of objects and it's powerful and scalable enough. Hopefully, it will continue like this for bigger clients also.

Only one technician is maintaining the solution itself and one enterprise architect on the client side. It only requires a small team for maintenance. 

I would rate their technical support a four out of five. It's sufficient because when I need something explained or to know, for example, how to do imports, the service desk really carefully solved my needs. Also published user/solution documentation is in the current version very comprehensive, I am satisfied.

Before this solution, I would make a model in Visio, PowerPoint and such, not enterprise architecture management tools.

The first time I set it up years ago, it was really difficult for me to customize it because I am more of a business guy than a technician. Now it's much easier because of the metamodel editor that this solution now has so now it's much easier. 

Deployment takes about a few days or weeks. It's easy to use and adapt it, but it's a little bit difficult to negotiate with the client in terms of what to implement, what to be modeled, what kind of methodological backgrounds will be used. 

It's important to plan and think in advance, to be prepared in terms of what to model, for what purpose and for whom, and to prepare an internal enterprise architecture framework. Then only afterward implement it into a tool because the tool will guide you. But if you don't know what you want it's really open and customizable, but will not guide you. It's really important to work a few days or weeks on your framework and then easily implement it in the tool. 

The other advice I would give is from the beginning be in touch with C level management as a sponsor of enterprise architecture and use the reporting possibilities of the tool to satisfy them with insight into the architecture.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten because it's really powerful and I still haven't been able to take advantage of all if its many features. 

BiZZdesign Architect makes separates model from views and has a quite extensive set of analytical stuff built in to be very useful in complex environments. Typically enterprise architecture management and strategic portfolio planning can be supported with these tools as the architecture capability matures.

Next to a useful tool for strategic planning it is really helpful in a less mature environment as well. I used the software to easily import catalogs with applications, interfaces, contracts, and many other artifacts to start the modeling of my scope of concern pretty fast and come to compelling results for a plateau planning and roadmap.

It is only available for Windows right now and it really is an outdated interface and framework that is being used. As a Mac worker I really hate that and therefore any other product with less features would be considered a really good alternative.

I find the licensing model not fitting the market.

10 years

Nope. No issues with deployment. Easy installer. It just works.

Yes, it can crash. Save your work frequently!

Nope, no issues and no need.

Good - 8

Good - 8

I used Archi at first but this is only for creating views and not for maintaining a model, which in the core is the real architectural work.

Straight forward. You have to tune to get the best practice results out of the tool. A course is highly recommended.

in-house.

n/a

You need good tools. Just choose one and be good at it!

Yes but not to much. I was certified in the tool, archimate and togaf at Bizzdesign headquarters so it is mainly because of that, that I use this product.

Choose wisely. I did not take the time to investigate on other tools until now. I am willing to let Bizzdesign Architect go for a good Mac solution that also has a separation in model, views and analytics.

Our customers' primary use cases include application portfolio, information, and data architecture.

The most valuable features are the application, portfolio, data, architectures, and modeling things.

The automatic data collection and interface need improvement. 

We've been using this solution since 2016. 

The stability is fine. 

Scalability is okay. There are twenty users in my company.

We require two staff members for the maintenance. 

Their support is really good.

The deployment took one month. 

We are the implementation consultants. 

I would recommend it.

In the next release, I would like to see an open API.

I would rate BIZZdesign a nine out of ten.

Our primary use for this solution was architecture modeling and ArchiMate. We have now switched and are no longer using this solution.

It was deployed on-premises.

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 version that I have seen is not stable.

The version that I have seen is not scalable. That is when the problems arose.

We contacted technical support when we had our problems. The tried helping us, but I'm not saying that I was satisfied. On a scale from one to ten, I would rate them a five, or six, max.

The initial setup of this solution was very straightforward.

The deployment took perhaps half an hour when we were installing locally, and then using a file server. When we switched to a database, we needed the organizational procedures. So, this takes a little longer. Overall, it is not a problem for BiZZdesign.

We deployed this solution ourselves.

We did evaluate other options before choosing BiZZdesign, although I am not sure why we selected this option.

We have now moved to a new solution that works. The most important things are stability, collaboration, and of course, the user experience. Stability is a very important part of the user experience.

I do not recommend using BiZZdesign. It is too much of a niche solution. Solutions like Enterprise Architect, or Visual Paradigm, are much more usable for the different kinds of audiences and users. For example, with Visual Paradigm, you can also model business processes and UML models.

I would rate this solution a one out of ten.