We performed a comparison between ARIS BPA 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.
"you want to do modeling with the old notation form, ours was EPC, you can use the same object in the BPMN because the database is built in a way that you can use both things. So you only have to define it once, and if the notation form is BPMN and those kind of activities, you can use the same EPCs, so there is a connection between them."
"The most valuable features are business process modeling and reporting."
"It has helped me get some ideas across more clearly to my colleagues."
"Also, the UML parts have been improved very much in the last two years. And it's very powerful now to combine the BPMN and UML parts in the product, because you can make a connection between them, so that you have the right interoperability between them. So if you're doing data modeling, you can use your class diagram and bind that to the BPMN part."
"Collaboration and governance over enterprise artifacts."
"ARIS BPA is customizable as per specific business requirements."
"One of the many advantages of ARIS is that it is supported by a very strong BPM community, which is critical for us. Although it has been in business for many years, it is still at an early stage of evolution. There are so many instances where your specific use case or requirement for using ARIS hasn't necessarily been matured across the sector. So, you need access to a very active community to help you explore possible solutions and ways in which ARIS can be used to achieve those use cases."
"From an architectural point of view, when you're looking at the business area, you can find all the information you have to use as an architect."
"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."
"No Magic has the tools and capability to model a complete enterprise and all product lines."
"There is a lot of documentation available on the Internet to understand its functionality."
"The most valuable features are the visibility, standard compliance, and interface."
"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."
"It is pretty easy to use. It is pretty versatile."
"The technical support is very good."
"It is very user-friendly, and the customer service is really good."
"They should make improvements as per customer requirements."
"In terms of improvement, the app could use some small details and functionalities."
"The Risk and Compliance Management tool is rather complex and moreover, it needs to be customized if you want to use it."
"The tool needs to improve its support since they take long to respond."
"The standard out-of-the-box solutions for modeling are not so good. You have to do some configuration to make it easier and more user-friendly."
"User interface (UI)."
"There should be a more intuitive tool when creating reports."
"The user interface could be more intuitive and better designed."
"The cost of upgrading the product should be lower."
"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."
"The technical support is not very good."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"I would like to see the ability to deploy live business process models and capture real-time data (without the need for another product tool) so you don't have to be dependent on other products for this functionality."
ARIS BPA is ranked 4th in Business Process Design with 64 reviews while No Magic MagicDraw is ranked 10th in Business Process Design with 17 reviews. ARIS BPA is rated 8.4, while No Magic MagicDraw is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of ARIS BPA writes "I can usually find an answer to my issue on ARIS Community". 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". ARIS BPA is most compared with SAP Signavio Process Manager, ADONIS, Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect, Camunda and Bizagi, whereas No Magic MagicDraw is most compared with Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect, Visio, Visual Paradigm, Lucidchart and Camunda. See our ARIS BPA 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.
