We just raised a $30M Series A: Read our story

No Magic MagicDraw OverviewUNIXBusinessApplication

No Magic MagicDraw is the #10 ranked solution in our list of Business Process Design tools. It is most often compared to Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect: No Magic MagicDraw vs Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect

What is No Magic MagicDraw?
MagicDraw is the award-winning business process, architecture, software and system modeling tool with teamwork support. Designed for Business Analysts, Software Analysts, Programmers, QA Engineers, and Documentation Writers, this dynamic and versatile development tool facilitates analysis and design of Object Oriented (OO) systems and databases.

No Magic MagicDraw is also known as MagicDraw.

No Magic MagicDraw Buyer's Guide

Download the No Magic MagicDraw Buyer's Guide including reviews and more. Updated: October 2021

No Magic MagicDraw Customers
Northrop Grumman, Labcorp, Deposco, ClearView Training, IT Services Promotion Agency, Intelligent Chaos, Metalithic Systems Inc., Sodifrance
No Magic MagicDraw Video

Pricing Advice

What users are saying about No Magic MagicDraw pricing:
  • "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)."
  • "In addition to the initial cost, you have to pay annually for support in order to get the upgrades."
  • "The licensing is on a yearly basis, and it's expensive."

No Magic MagicDraw Reviews

Filter by:
Filter Reviews
Industry
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Company Size
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Job Level
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Rating
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Considered
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Order by:
Loading...
  • Date
  • Highest Rating
  • Lowest Rating
  • Review Length
Search:
Showingreviews based on the current filters. Reset all filters
WL
Systems Engeriner at SIMTRS
Real User
Top 20
I like the simulation part, so you can simulate your model to validate it

Pros and Cons

  • "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."
  • "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."

What is our primary use case?

It's now called Cameo Enterprise Architect 19. It is my system engineering tool.

I do systems engineering. If you go to my website, www.simtrs.com, there are simulation and training for this solution. You will see the benefits of MagicDraw and how I use it.

I use it for systems engineering and life cycle systems engineering, and even for deployment. 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.

What is most valuable?

We are getting away from the old ways of writing a lot of papers and requirements documents, architecture documents, technical solution documents, interface documents - those days are gone. MagicDraw allows you to model the requirements and by doing so, you've got a good chance of not missing any requirements. The old way of doing things was to decompose the requirements into shell statements.

But when you model it, you will be able to practically make sure you don't miss anything. MagicDraw has a good modeling tool you use for case diagrams. Its use case diagram is part of the UML and SysML that you can use to model requirements to create an architecture. I've created a lot of architectures for the Army and also mapped those components of the architecture as the test procedures.

What needs improvement?

I wouldn't say anything negative about No Magic MagicDraw. But there is a steep learning curve. The steep learning curve applies to two things - system engineering and INCOSE. INCOSE, I-N-C-O-S-E international systems engineering. INCOSE is what most people use today for system engineering, for building systems, and deploying and maintaining them in a full life cycle. For MagicDraw there is a steep learning curve if you don't have the system engineering domain experience because a lot of folks go in there and say, "Okay, I'm going to do model-based system engineering." MagicDraw has a model-based system engineering tool but it only allows you to draw the diagram or the model. Then you need to understand the relationships between the processes and activities.

So some people can pick it up, but it's a steep learning curve. You have to do the correct keystrokes to portray what it is you're really trying to do. You take a picture, an ER diagram, Entity Relationship diagram, which is a diagram that shows all the components and how they relate to each other, not just an arrow. You can say this component influences another component or another component enables integration, etc... Things like that. You have to know what your relationships are and MagicDraw allows you to do that really well.

But they do provide manuals. They have a lot of manuals that you can go through for each plug-in they have. You have the system engineering piece, and then you have the DoDAAC, which is the DOD architecture. They use what they call a UPDM, that's a DoDAAC standard. You also have the UAF. System Ellis is the base for everything, but you've got other pieces for the government first. When working for the government, they require that you do your architecture using the DoDAAC. So it has the DoDAAC too, because the government likes certain things. It depends on who your customer is and what they want.

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.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using No Magic MagicDraw for about 10 years.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The way MagicDraw scales is very good. You have the team server which allows a lot of people to use the product for a specific path. I can create different pieces because you don't want to have hundreds of sheets of the same model. Imagine you're flying a plane and you come over a city and see the view from 10,000 feet. But then as you come down you come into more details. When you're on the ground you'll be going to a bathroom, for example. If you want a model of the bathroom you've got to be able to set it up.

MagicDraw will scale that way, but someone has to be able to set it up to give you that granularity. You can get the bird's eye view or you can get the pie in the sky. It's like you are in an aircraft. You can see the city, but as you come down lower, you see the cars start running on the freeways. And as you get lower, you can see the toll booths and the gas stations. That is how it scales, but you have to have the ingenuity to be able to model it so that you can flip from model to model, which it allows. But it would be nice if I could have hyperlinks in there, where I could take the big model, click and see, just like you see Google Earth.

As you click it further up and down, it gets bigger and smaller and smaller and smaller until you get down to the very house that you live in. It'd be nice if they add hyperlinks or something like that so your customer wouldn't have to be an expert in MagicDraw. Because the way it is now, I have to import it to JPEG's or to files and organize it in such a way that it would take me a lot of time to describe what an architecture is. This is especially true for large systems. For small systems it's not a problem but for large systems it can be. For example, if you want to draw an architectural automobile, you start with the basics. But then when you start drilling down into the engine and the carburetor and all those different things, it can get very hairy. So you've got to be able to organize it in such a way and that capability isn't there. You have to do that manually.

What other advice do I have?

On a scale of one to ten, I would give No Magic MagicDraw a nine.

Overall I find it very effective and the customers are happy with it.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate
Terry Jones
President at I2R, Inc.
Real User
Top 5Leaderboard
Great for model-based engineering with lots of excellent features and good technical support

Pros and Cons

  • "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."
  • "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."

What is our primary use case?

I use CAE software to support my consulting practice.  I'm an independent consultant and I use it with my clients primarily for business transformation projects - define, assess and re-design business architecture to either prepare for ERP projects or to improve existing business practices. When I use the term business architecture, I'm primarily talking about looking at corporate strategy, business organizational structure, business process designs, and IT & Software architecture.  

How has it helped my organization?

The No Magic CAE tool enables me to provide my clients with an interactive solution that can be used to analyze current business architecture and make modifications to support new future state designs.

What is most valuable?

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, for managing new product development from cradle to grave. However, it's my understanding that No Magic CAE was initially designed and developed for model-based systems engineering and has grown to incorporate business architecture design and modeling capabilities. It takes away the mounds of paper and puts it into a model. It enables you to generate a digital model of your product or service solution that can be ran through simulations and tested before you spend a single penny on bending metal or configuring a new ERP software application. This can result in massive cost savings.

Having standard symbology is very important in the modeling industry.  The No Magic suite of products follows the Object Management Group (OMG) standards for modeling.

No Magic has an annual symposium in Allen, Texas, at what used to be their corporate headquarters location.  It's a very big event where you can learn a lot about how companies are using their software to more efficiently design and deploy new product and service solutions.  I had the opportunity to meet company executives and representatives from across the globe at their event back n 2015. Having the opportunity to observe some live demonstrations as it happened was very informative.

What needs improvement?

The software is a little more challenging if you haven't been trained on how to use it.  No Magic has developed many guides and documents to assist your learning effort, but it doesn't replace that good ole fashion hands-on classroom training.  With No Magic, you are basically give a blank canvas then you choose the modeling perspective you are going to use for your model.  

To me, one of the one of the big keys to understanding the modeling environment, is understanding and knowing what perspectives and tools to use and where due to the fact that there are tons of ways that you can model something. While there is not necessarily a right or wrong way to modeling, you need a standard approach, but you still don't use all the tools that are necessarily available in that set. It can get confusing.

When you go into creating a model, you select the perspective you want to use.  However, if you crossover perspectives, as I sometimes do, to get to different modeling elements, I have had problems with my symbology changing without being able to reverse it.  I thinks there are opportunities for improvement and will be for some time to come.  But I believe that at some point in the future, the modeling symbology will be more standardize across the various modeling perspectives.  

One of the biggest problems with model-based systems engineering is that there just isn't enough training. There are certain colleges beginning to introduce it and use it in the classroom. There's just not been a whole lot of training out there for it like there is in a lot of other areas.

For how long have I used the solution?

I started using the No Magic Cameo Enterprise Architecture (CAE) solution in 2015.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Without being repetitive, I consider the solution to be rather stable.  Just the cross over between model perspectives can cause some hiccups.  


What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The good thing, in terms of scalability, is that you can have multiple people working on the same model through a teamwork server which enables you share models and you can have multiple people interacting on the same model. 

I do know that multiple federal agencies across DoD -- Army, Navy, and Air Force, as well as NASA are beginning to recognize the potential cost and schedule savings that can be achieved using model based systems engineering tools like No Magic's CAE.  I can foresee a future where your product/service concept begins with a digital model than can be tested, verified, validated, and approved or rejected, before the prototype development begins. 

How are customer service and technical support?

I've had good support from them. They have been very responsive when I've submitted problem tickets in the past.  I've always had the opportunity to discuss my issues with a live tech when necessary.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

I've attempted to use various process modeling tools, but none are as comprehensive as the No Magic CAE software.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was a little complex. However, they just recently made a change, so the process is going to be a little different going forward.  That's part of the transition to Dassault, the company that acquired No Magic.

Deployment doesn't take that long. It's just a matter of them giving you the seat license and then you have to go to the website and/or download the application and run it. 

What about the implementation team?

No.

What was our ROI?

Grows with every new client.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

When you purchase a No Magic product, you are buying a seat license.  I would say licensing cost ranges anywhere from $3,500 to $6,500 per seat (depending on the software and plugins you purchase).  Then you have an annual maintenance/service agreement if you want to have technical support and receive software updates.  It would probably run from 250.00-1500 per seat.  

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

Yes.  Bizagi, ARIS, Signavio, bpm online, iGrafix, etc.

What other advice do I have?

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. I know there are some little nuisances here and there. Still, it works. I've had good success with it. It's got a lot of capability. It's just a little pricey. On the market right now, there is a lot of software out there that's pretty pricey, and many out there that are a lot more expensive. Like ARIS, for example.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Learn what your peers think about No Magic MagicDraw. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: October 2021.
541,708 professionals have used our research since 2012.
WM
Adjunct Professor at a university with 501-1,000 employees
Real User
Top 20
Flexible modeling with team collaboration, but need improvements to the object management group and user manuals

Pros and Cons

  • "The most valuable feature is the amount of flexibility that one has to model, which is great for an individual."
  • "When I am working with my Mac and I right-click to copy and paste, it doesn't work."

What is our primary use case?

The primary use case of this solution is for modeling and collaboration.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable feature is the amount of flexibility that one has to model, which is great for an individual. But it becomes a problem when you're trying to collaborate within a team. It is not a strongly coupled tool.

What needs improvement?

I dabble with the OMG (object management group) in terms of definitions of standard. OMG is now working on SysML version 2.0 and there is significant work that needs to be done to eliminate some of the ambiguities and foibles in the standard itself.

The user interface could have better quality tutorials. When I go to the manual, I can hyperlink along, but there are subtleties that you literally have to find by trying and doing.

One of the issues I am currently experiencing is with one of my environments. I use a Windows environment and a Mac environment. When I am working with my Mac and I right-click to copy and paste, it doesn't work. 

I find myself going back to the old control characters like Ctrl-C to copy and Ctrl-V to paste. Also, some of the ways that one can create elements and move more at a hierarchy in the model of view and the browser, don't work. I finally found an approach that has worked. 

In the next release, it would be better to have cleaner manuals that lead people along in a simpler way.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been an occasional user of No Magic MagicDraw for approximately five years.

We are running two different versions at the moment. One is version 18.5 and the other is version 19.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

This solution is stable. I have not experienced any glitches and nothing has crashed that I haven't been the cause of.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

This is a scalable tool. It's very flexible and all of the stereotypes that you can select or add, for example, we call it the 80/20 rule, where 20% of the tool usage gets you to 80% of the capabilities you need. 

How are customer service and technical support?

I have not had the need to contact technical support.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

Previously, I used the Sparx Enterprise Architect. I still use it on occasion.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is straightforward.

We have an in-house team to maintain this solution.

What about the implementation team?

For one of them, we had a government administrator to set it up. I did the other one myself.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

I am not aware of the costs, as this solution is offered to me by the clients.

What other advice do I have?

I am a sole proprietor consultant and I work within teams that are a mix of contractors and government employees. Also, I am an adjunct professor.

My advice goes back to the 80/20 rule. There is 20% of the basic fundamental capabilities that you will get you 80% of what you need or more.

My advice is to have a standard framework for a model within the enterprise. In terms of a standard hierarchy structure, know where you put the requirements or the logical architecture. Also, know how it changes depending on whether you are dealing with a system or with a system's assistance. The system's assistance depends on whether you have a directed governance environment or a federal, or coalition of the willing.

Because of the issues, I am experiencing with the OMG, I would rate this solution a five out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
KC
Expert System Engineer at a transportation company with 51-200 employees
Real User
Top 20
Can be customized to your needs and the technical support is good

Pros and Cons

  • "The technical support is very good."
  • "The cost of upgrading the product should be lower."

What is our primary use case?

We use MagicDraw for model-based systems engineering. It differs from standard systems engineering applications by using models, as opposed to words or sheets. We define our system or subsystems via models and interfaces and then define the relationships between them.

It is used mostly during the design phase of all of our projects. After the production and testing phases, it is no longer used.

What is most valuable?

This solution can be customized to your needs.

The technical support is very good.

It is easy to set up and use.

What needs improvement?

The cost of upgrading the product should be lower.

It would be useful if there were a way of comparing the production and design models. It is not necessary because there are other tools to validate the design but having it included would be good.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using MagicDraw for more close to four years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It is very stable. They also update the software and when they do, they send an email to let us know what has changed and what new features we can use.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

We have six users in the company.

How are customer service and technical support?

I have been in contact with technical support and they are always there to help you. Whenever I need something, they help me. For example, I was trying to create numbers for a subsystem that followed a pattern like A1, A2, A3... but I could not find it in the program. When I contacted support, they told me that it was possible and they taught me how to do it. In the end, I was able to do it.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is very easy.

What about the implementation team?

I set up this software and the Teamwork Server that we use to allow multiple people to work on the same projects. After receiving the software, it took me less than a week to deploy it.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

In addition to the initial cost, you have to pay annually for support in order to get the upgrades.

What other advice do I have?

My advice to anybody who is designing complex projects, like defense projects or space projects, is that they have to use this program or one like it. All of the stakeholders have to understand that they need to review the product using models, in addition to the documents. Following this will ensure that it is very easy to understand the product that is being designed. 

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Terry Jones
President at I2R, Inc.
Real User
Top 5Leaderboard
Quickly build multiple layers within the organizational and business process environments

Pros and Cons

  • "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."
  • "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."

What is our primary use case?

Our primary use for this solution is enterprise modeling, providing integration between program management and systems engineering.  For several years now, I have focused on building a model for continuous improvement that integrates strategy planning, project management, analytics, process design, and change management that I can implement for clients. Magic Draw provides, I would say, an eighty-percent solution for this capability. More so than any other product that I've evaluated.

How has it helped my organization?

I use Magic Draw for program/systems modeling to support client engagements.

I used Magic Draw most recently to model from the strategic level down to the business process level for a company that is preparing for an ERP project. I was able to provide the client with an interactive tool that they can use to improve their existing business processes that cross multiple functional boundaries, accounting, logistics, manufacturing, marketing, sales, etc.

What is most valuable?

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.

What needs improvement?

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 bottom line is that it's very frustrating to have to acquire multiple tools to build a business process automation capability. Magic Draw, with all its capability, comes the closest, at least in my opinion, to providing a complete product that supports both the business and engineering sides of the equation. 

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using this solution for four years.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

This solution fits my use case better than any other product that I have evaluated. Some of the competitors are ARIS BPM and Bizagi.

What other advice do I have?

Magic Draw has capabilities that I'm sure I haven't even touched on, but at least for what I'm attempting to achieve, it provides the most capability to meet my needs at this point in time.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
MH
Director, Strategy and Consulting at a university with 5,001-10,000 employees
Real User
Top 5Leaderboard
Integrates well with requirements management tools but needs profiles and ready-to-use patterns

Pros and Cons

  • "I think one of the key things is the plugins for integration with requirements management tools like Doors"
  • "The UI UX of the tool is not really user-friendly and needs to be completely reformed."

What is our primary use case?

We use it for model based system engineering (MDSE).

What is most valuable?

I think one of the key things is the plugins for integration with requirements management tools like Doors. I think this is very helpful.

No Magic MagicDraw provides a lot of good features on functionality.

What needs improvement?

The documentation for MagicDraw and the video tutorials compared to those of the other companies are really a big area for improvement.

The other area would be having some profiles and ready-to-use patterns. It's something that is missing in MagicDraw compared to that in other tools. I think that it would be very helpful to have such profiles and ready-to-use patterns that would kickstart any architecture asset.

Licensing is expensive for this solution.

I believe that the overall UX needs to be completely reformed. The UI UX of the tool is not really user-friendly.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using MagicDraw for probably three years now.

How are customer service and technical support?

Our experience with technical support was positive. They responded in 24 to 48 hours.

How was the initial setup?

I think the overall setup was very straightforward and easy; nothing was really complex. It took a minimal amount of time given that it's on-premises.

What about the implementation team?

I did the deployment myself.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

The licensing is on a yearly basis, and it's expensive. This is one of the qualms of this solution, and that's one of the reasons why we're not going to continue using it.

I would rate it at seven on scale from one to ten because it's still a good tool. It provides a lot of good features on functionality but still has room for improvement.

What other advice do I have?

Before you start implementing No Magic MagicDraw, I would definitely recommend that you look at other solutions. You could take a look at Sparks and compare both Sparks and MagicDraw before you proceed with MagicDraw.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate
PalcsoAttila
CEO at SEP Consulting kft.
Reseller
Top 5
Has good accuracy and flexibility

Pros and Cons

  • "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 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."

What is our primary use case?

We use MagicDraw for software design from scratch. We redesigned an electric signature in the last year. It is a good tool. It's a little better than Enterprise Architect. But we cannot delegate the final processes to the user client. I need to export the results to Confluence where the client can check it.

What needs improvement?

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 how long have I used the solution?

-

How are customer service and technical support?

Technical support is okay. If we have a question, they respond. 

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is complex. The repository has to be installed. It's complex and it should be easier. Our clients are enterprise-sized. They have 60 people who work in software development. This company only focuses on a certain project. We also work with a medium-sized company that has bigger projects. 

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

The only other solution I know is Enterprise Architect. I got reports for the BI. My company is looking to take a step forward and closer to BI solutions. I looked at solutions that we can use for development in the next year.

What other advice do I have?

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. 

Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Reseller.
MH
Director, Strategy and Consulting at a university with 5,001-10,000 employees
Real User
Top 5Leaderboard
Good model-based engineering and responsive support, but the documentation needs improvement

Pros and Cons

  • "The MBFC capability of MagicDraw is higher than the other competitors."
  • "The documentation for MagicDraw and the video tutorials compared to other competitors is an area for improvement."

What is our primary use case?

I am using MagicDraw as part of my research project.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable feature of this solution would be model-based system engineering. The MBSE capability of MagicDraw is higher than the other competitors.

What needs improvement?

The documentation for MagicDraw and the video tutorials compared to other competitors is an area for improvement.

In the next release, I would like to see more profiles and ready to use patterns. Rather than working from scratch, I would like to be able to tap into these patterns.

Some of the other competitors have that capability and I think that it is extremely helpful.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It's a stable solution. We have not had any issues.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

I am not able to assess the scalability as we have not attempted to scale beyond the initial installation.

How are customer service and technical support?

My experience with technical support was good.

I haven't interacted with them often but their response was reasonably fast. I usually get a response within 24 to 48 hours.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is straightforward.

What about the implementation team?

We completed the implementation in-house.

What other advice do I have?

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate