Piotr MazurDigital Transformation Solution Manager at Altkom Software & Consutling
Anonymous UserAdjunct Professor at a university
Anonymous UserSoftware Engineer / Application Developer & Systems Engineer at a transportation company
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"The most valuable feature is the ability to share the logic within the rules engine with the business, so you can put it up for everybody to read."
"When I compare it with other BPM tools, like IBM, it is great, open source, and free when you use the community version."
"The solution is easily compatible with HTML forms and HTML language programming and that is the most significant part."
"The speed and execution of DMN was a big selling point for us. It's very good at conducting business processes that are easily modeled and presented in a way that's easy to understand."
"It allows me to present or to demonstrate the business process flow, visually, without having to resort to PowerPoint, Visio, or other products."
"It has an open BPM"
"The interface and the number of connectors that they provide are the most valuable features. The support here, it's kind of okay. But the main thing is with the number of connectors and the UI, the user interface."
"Being able to use a Java-based solution makes the product flexible."
"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."
"The technical support is very good."
"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."
"The most valuable feature is the amount of flexibility that one has to model, which is great for an individual."
"The most valuable features are the visibility, standard compliance, and interface."
"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 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."
"The MBFC capability of MagicDraw is higher than the other competitors."
"Some of the business processes are very easy to compare when you have the diagrams."
"I like that there is support for software patterns."
"The most valuable features are the flexibility and adaptability of Sparx Enterprise Architect."
"The most valuable feature is the integrated data model, so if I change the name of an item, all models using that object are automatically updated."
"Ability to keep inventory of reusable blocks, and use in different diagrams with views of various templates."
"The initial setup is easy."
"Scalability is not a problem. You can always increase the footprint of what the thing can do because it's so powerful."
"It has led some teams to do better code reviews - to be less focussed on coding conventions (syntax) and more focussed on the semantics because of the abstraction level clear design affords."
"I would like to see the forms engine available in the open-source version of this solution."
"I would like to have a feature for audit logging, audit logs and audit log management. And some history of use for the audit logs."
"I would also like a very easy to use form builder."
"Especially when you use the open-source version, there are issues with performance."
"If there were some industry templates it would have helped significantly, because it is similar to a process map for a domain. That is what we are currently creating, a domain-relevant process map."
"Lacking in forms visualization."
"The support definitely can be improved. Apart from that, the language should be extendable to other platforms. If I want to write, I'll run a different platform, like Python code on top of it, or COBOL code on top of it, and it should support those languages."
"The solution could use some enhancements like adding connectors, improving forms and having a mobile app, but everything is an enhancement rather than a flaw."
"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."
"The cost of upgrading the product should be lower."
"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."
"When I am working with my Mac and I right-click to copy and paste, it doesn't work."
"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."
"The licenses are expensive compared to similar tools. At the moment, the user is open to using MagicDraw if it's 15% more than other solutions. If it were to cost any more, they wouldn't use it."
"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."
"The documentation for MagicDraw and the video tutorials compared to other competitors is an area for improvement."
"I think that collaboration can be better."
"It would be nice to have it supported on the Linux operating system."
"Using EA involves a steep learning curve if you want to understand its capabilities and functionality."
"This solution should have better ease of use for the uninitiated."
"Not visually appealing."
"The documentation needs a bit of improvement. What I find is that when I'm trying to do something specific for some part of a project, in terms of documentation, it's kind of hard to get at figuring out if you don't use it all the time."
"I think the product is good. When I'm trying to do something specific for some part of project documentation, it's hard to get it figured out if you don't use it all the time. It's such a massive tool, it's hard to figure out how to dig in and get to the documentation where you have to be to get some idea of what to do. There are not a lot of examples that I'm aware of to be able to do that."
"Because its easy to create diagrams one needs to be vigilant on the housekeeping of orphaned fragments - I have written my own scripts to do this, maybe they are available now."
"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."
"I think Camunda BPM can improve their licensing costs. It isn't easy to find clients with Camunda BPM licenses mainly because it's quite expensive."
"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."
"In terms of cost, Sparx EA is probably one of the cheapest tools I have ever used."
"The licensing is not as expensive as some of the other data modeling tools such as Erwin."
"Its price is very good for the value that you get with it."
"They have the price on their site for the enterprise version, and we do receive a small discount."
"The licence has a costly upfront fee which gets you access. You have to pay an annual maintenance fee, which is less."
"It is cheaper than other solutions. Its cost is around $686 per year. There are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees."
"We have an annual license, and it's very affordable."
"I think our license costs roughly $1,000 a year, but I could be wrong."
Camunda Platform is a complete process automation tech stack with powerful execution engines for BPMN workflows and DMN decisions paired with essential applications for modeling, operations, and analytics.
With a clear vision to automate any process, anywhere, Camunda is reinventing process automation for the digital enterprise. Featuring a developer-friendly, open source approach, enterprises can use Camunda Platform to breakthrough technological, organizational, and infrastructure barriers, optimize their business processes, and drive their digital transformation initiatives forward.
Sparx Enterprise Architect is a platform that accelerates and integrates software, business and systems development. Twice winner of Jolt and multiple SD Times Awards with an installed base of 580,000 + licenses, supported by 230 partners in 160 countries. From requirements to implementation and beyond, Sparx Systems' Enterprise Architect is a fully featured tool suite that lets you model, design, simulate, prototype, build, test, manage and trace from vision to solution.
No Magic MagicDraw is ranked 10th in Business Process Design with 9 reviews while Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is ranked 3rd in Business Process Design with 30 reviews. No Magic MagicDraw is rated 7.8, while Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of No Magic MagicDraw writes "I like the simulation part, so you can simulate your model to validate it". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect writes "Great pricing with an easy initial setup and a comprehensive toolkit". No Magic MagicDraw is most compared with Visio, Visual Paradigm, Lucidchart, IBM System Architect and erwin Data Modeler (DM), whereas Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is most compared with Visual Paradigm, Visio, ARIS BPA, IBM Rational System Architect and Lucidchart. See our No Magic MagicDraw vs. Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect 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.