We performed a comparison between No Magic MagicDraw and Visio 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."It is very user-friendly, and the customer service is really good."
"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 of No Magic MagicDraw is the simulation capabilities and interface."
"The MBFC capability of MagicDraw is higher than the other competitors."
"No Magic has the tools and capability to model a complete enterprise and all product lines."
"Offers good standards compliance and is user-friendly."
"I think one of the key things is the plugins for integration with requirements management tools like Doors"
"The most valuable features are the visibility, standard compliance, and interface."
"Visio has allowed us to create good diagrams for our technical employees to consume. The solution provides templates, is straightforward, and has tools for the easy creation of diagrams."
"A good designation feature."
"What I like about it is that the templates are easily findable and usable, and they are usually created for other software packages. It seems to be pretty much widely adopted in the industry."
"It is very easy for people to start using this tool, and we can import Visio templates that are already published by vendors such as Azure without any issue."
"The most valuable feature is the set of diagramming tools."
"Visio is stable."
"It is stable. I have never experienced any issues."
"The diagramming and swimlane features allow for separating business functions."
"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."
"One potential area for improvement is the recommendation feature. At times, we face challenges in locating specific features, and we have to reach out for assistance in finding the information we need."
"There are some technical features that you have to study and do research on to be able to understand."
"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 technical support is not very good."
"The UI UX of the tool is not really user-friendly and needs to be completely reformed."
"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 user interface could be more robust."
"The big downside to Visio is that it's very difficult to push the design through to Power Automate, to become a workflow that you can use."
"If you look at ARIS, for example, or Signavio, the flowchart combines all the details and with the click of a button I can create a process manager. That would be something that Visio could add. It would cut my workload in half."
"The behavior of the interface can sometimes be unpredictable."
"Sometimes, there is a little bit of a learning curve with it, especially while doing complex network diagrams and getting the lines to snap the way you want them and not overlap or be confusing. It would be great if there was a built-in tutorial. It is not that you can't YouTube, but it would be nice if they gave you some free training. I've been using it forever, but every now and then, I got to do something complicated with it and I wonder how do I do that again. Maybe they do have such information, and I don't know. I have not done research on it because a bunch of people work for me, and some of them are better at it than I am, so I just ask them to do this for me."
"Its integration with other vendors can be better and support for other formats. For example, when we import a JPEG, we cannot customize it. Similarly, we can't utilize the BPML kind of diagrams."
"The control flow feature needs to be improved. I compared Visio to Bizagi and found that control flow is better with Bizagi. The improvements that can be made to the solution depends on the user."
"The solution should have better integration capabilities with MacOS and Linux."
No Magic MagicDraw is ranked 9th in Business Process Design with 6 reviews while Visio is ranked 1st in Business Process Design with 28 reviews. No Magic MagicDraw is rated 8.2, while Visio is rated 7.8. 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". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Visio writes "Provides a quick way to spruce up client reports and proposals with rudimentary yet impactful visuals". No Magic MagicDraw is most compared with Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect, Visual Paradigm, Lucidchart, erwin Data Modeler by Quest and IBM System Architect, whereas Visio is most compared with Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect, Bizagi, Visual Paradigm, IBM Blueworks Live and iServer. See our No Magic MagicDraw vs. Visio 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.