I used ER/Studio and erwin Data Modeler in the past, and I had stopped using them and instead used Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect because I moved companies. erwin Data Modeler and ER/Studio were very expensive tools, and their costs couldn't be justified.

I'm not well-versed in many other tools of this scale, though I've seen Visual Paradigm, which seems nice. However, Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect has been used by our company for many years, making it a staple tool for us. 

Despite some thinking it's complicated for modern development, its utility for those familiar with it is undeniable. I would recommend it, as we don't consider replacing it due to any significant shortcomings.

We are using both Sparx Systems and MEGA HOPEX. Our organization bought both solutions. 

IBM Rational, but not many companies could afford it.

I previously used to work on Salamander but it did not add on what I already know. I was also recently teaching Visual Paradigm and ArchiMate.

I know some of the other web-based solutions - but not as good as Sparx EA. For UML modeling, I used (since 2000) Modelmaker which could create C# and Delphi code (which was sadly discontinued). First, I moved to Sparx because Modelmaker was discontinued, but as my projects shifted more and more from Software Development to Enterprise Architecture, it was a better-suited tool for the challenges I faced. 

I tried to build a design with another solution two or three years ago, but there was something wrong and it was very slow. It was called Business Design. So, basically, I just said that I cannot use it for the scale of the task that I have. I simply cannot use that tool. They could maybe tune it up. I'm not blaming the tool itself, but my experience with it was really negative. I expect that the Sparx program will be faster.

We used to use MagicDraw, and the switch was due to cost. MagicDraw was about $32,000.

We used MagicDraw and switched to Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect because it has a better UI and also has profiles and ready-made templates.

In different contexts and organizations, I have tried and used different modeling tools. That said, when I have the choice of tool to use for architecture modeling I always select Enterprise Architect for its usability (even though it is a complex tool), completeness, and extensibility.

The Solution Architect team used a combination of Visio (UML), Word (Document Templates), Excel (Requirements) and SharePoint (Repository). Sparx replaced all of this while retaining all of the prior tool features and enabled cross-functional team collaboration for solutioning.

I have tried different packages. VCL is a very well-known package, which can also generate code to a certain extent and create documents, but it is limited. I have used a number of open-source tools, such as Star UML. There are a lot of different packages that are good in a certain area, but you can't combine things very easily. They require a lot of work and a lot of people to collect the information by using Excel tables or databases.

I have also used MagicDraw. We changed from MagicDraw to Enterprise Architect because the client has Enterprise Architect, and we have tried to export all the delivery products to the Enterprise Architect, and more or less, it should be possible.

We were using other solutions and we switched to Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect because it is lightweight, simple to use, and inexpensive.

I was employed on contract by this company, but I had previously used Orbus iServer for Process modeling and developing Business and Enterprise Architecture artifacts. This company had previously used Visio. 

Other solutions in earlier years. This product was an initial purchase for this need and did not replace any other product within this context.

Previously, I worked with IBM data modeling, called Data Architect tool with a different company. My experience with Erwin was brief but not very extensive.

When I changed jobs, we were evaluating other data modeling tools and finally chose the Sparx Enterprise Architect.

We use Bonita, Lucidchart and erwin.

We had three months to compare and after that, we concluded that Bonita was very difficult to use for beginners. You have to have the experience, it's not easy for someone starting their career.

Sparx is more complex but in terms of functionality, it is easier to use. 

We are not acquainted with any other solution.

There were two products, which were very popular initially. One was STP that was developed by people who started the object paradigm and human modeling. Rational Rose was the other one, which was taken away by IBM, and it was lost. After that, many other tools appeared.

MS Visio was used for tractability and maintenance, and many other concerns, were the reasons that we switched.

A few years ago, I used Rational Rose, and Sparx Enterprise Architect is similar. In comparison to Rational Rose, it's more stable.

I have used MEGA HOPEX in my earlier company, but it is very complex to understand and costly.

Personally, I've used a lot of different solutions, and a lot of different kinds of case tools. However, in both my client environments that we are presently using, we presently implemented Sparx and they had nothing like this before. This is really an eye-opener to them and a new kind of field for them to go into.

IBM's tools and a number of other tools primarily UML focused. In v7 Sparx was miles ahead of the competition, fast, flexible, priced affordable.

I actually used a tool called TCC, Together Control Centre many years back which was very similar. It was created by Peter Coad of the (Coad-Yourdon methodology).

Unfortunately, some ruthless venture capitalist got control of the companies and tore it to pieces trying to make it a do all be all tool ("It's a floor wax - its a dessert topping").

I was previously using PTC Windchill and we switched to Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect because it was too expensive.

We switched from Rational Rose due to the extreme affordability of Sparx Enterprise Architect for the capabilities and quality of the solution.

I've used a few other tools such as public domain RG and System Architect. EA is a good, cheap, flexible, and capable tool.

I work with IBM in enterprise architecture as the project manager. I used to use IBM Rational System Architect. I can now see as a consultant what I am able to offer the customer, not only that of IBM, of course. I am currently seeking solutions other than IBM. 

I previously used other tools, such as IBM's enterprise architect, although the tool has since been sold and the company changed. The IBM tool offers certain customization features which are not found in Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect, although I can live with what it has at the moment. 

We used erwin. Erwin was unstable and didn't handle the model as the size grew.

I have used many computer assisted software engineering a model driven architecture tools including some I developed for military application. The list includes Excellator, Uniface, Power Designer, Oracle Designer, Rational Rose, and Software through Pictures, System Architect, Protégé, Microsoft Visio, Eclipse, Visual Studio, and Oxygen.

I use this because of it's low cost per seat, ease of use, MOF/UML based namespace control, high level of standardized notational support, and portability.

In the past, I've used Enterprise Architecture. It gives you a good overview of the tool, however, I found it was difficult for me to take that example and apply it to what I'm trying to accomplish in documenting the design.

I have used other tools (DOORS, Rational, etc.), but always found them more limited, clunky, and expensive.

Visio - it's like comparing crayons and paper to a spreadsheet.

BizzDesign - a very polished tool but much less flexible and customizable than Sparx EA. Also much more expensive.

I’ve used many solutions over the years. I tend to come back to Sparx because it is the best value for the money.

Before I used IBM Rational Rose. I switched because of my move from IBM to another employer.

Yes, we used Rational Rose and we switched because of cost of prior solution.

I'm currently considering using MagicDraw.

Previously with another company, I was using ARIS.

Enterprise Architect is strong for them. UML is a very good solution for its purpose.

They were able to generate the codes. They were presenting me with the ability to transform BPMN to BPAL notations, convert, and then somehow enrich the BPAL notation to create an executable code from that. It's a useful tool for coding.

We previously used rational tools (Rose, RSA and some other rational tools as well). This product is much cheaper and enough for our needs.

I have used MS Visio (various versions) before and have found that EA provides a far better documentation environment. It is definitely easier to keep diagrams ordered and filed away in EA than with Visio.

I have used Sybase Power Designer for database design, but I think Sparx is more comprehensive.

Rational - no DB repository and it needed to be merged among the team members as XML files via external versioning system. Documentation, requirements, development all needed to be bought as separate tools which was too expensive. It crashes when a project (repo in files) is really big. There's no possibility to merge in real time and this can last hours, and often crashes.

I've used MS Visio before, but the tools are not really comparable.

I've used MS Visio before but the tools are not really comparable.

I was previously using Microsoft Visio and PowerPoint for creating visual models.

I used Rational Rose for UML modeling before this. Currently, I use Software AG's ARIS for enterprise architecture and Sparx EA for information modeling and solution architecture. Sparx does not have the depth that ARIS provides but I like the flexibility and ease of use , despite its lack of reporting and import capabilities.

I have used more expensive modelling tools such as Rational Rose, Provision, PowerDesigner, and Visio. Sparx EA beats all of these hands down on a cost/benefit analysis.

There were some applications being used for business process and system documentation – every department with its own. Slowly, the need for a more powerful tool became obvious, and at the time, one of the requirements put on the table was to unite different departments documenting efforts. After some evaluation, we came to the conclusion – in the IT and telecommunications areas, that usual written documents concerning systems and their design, start to become outdated at the moment of being published. Supporting models that can somehow automatically generate documentation was the real thing. Besides the impact analysis from models appear to be natural activity and the result is actual at the moment of generation. According to us, Sparx EA was ideal for this need.

I used Visio. No comparison, SPARX much better.

Aris was our previous tool. It was not extensively used but we decided to go with Enterprise Architect. In my work, sometimes I used Aris combined with Enterprise Architect. Aris was for business processing and Enterprise Architect was for mainly IT architecture.

Word (Microsoft Office), Visio.

We previously used MAP.

ARIS Business Architect, ARIS Business Designer. 

Sparx EA is better suited for small and medium-sized companies, cheaper and easier in terms of training. It is better suited to modeling on ArchiMate 3.0 notation.