Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect Reviews

• Available architecture frameworks
• Ability to generate documentation
• Forward and reverse engineering capabilities
• Extensibility

• Documented operational processes of all business departments using Archimate 2.0 framework
• Able to depict bottleneck areas - risky processes, infrastructure deficiencies, and opportunities to reuse strategic content
• Visualization of the business was a major benefit

• Ease of customization to develop internal frameworks
• Custom templates and diagrams

I've used it over six years.

Multi-user, enterprise model sharing requires some IT help but overall the experience is pretty straight forward and positive.

No, it's a stable and mature product with good online and community support.

Running large and complex models (ours contained thousands of objects) does require a powerful machine with 8+GB of RAM.

I did not need to use the actual customer service as there are a few books published by EA experts, and community answers are available as well.

9/10, as most of the technical issues are quickly resolved.

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

It's very easy and straight forward to setup, and so are the updates.

It was all done in-house.

It's extremely high.

The original setup was about half an hour of my time, and updates are in the 10 minute range. The network repository took a day to establish, configure and start using. Daily costs are negligible.

• Rational Rose
• Eclipse Modeling
• CA Erwin

Buy Peter Doomen's book "Fifty Enterprise Architect Tricks" book, join the Sparx and LinkedIn communities of experts.

We use Enterprise Architect for application inventory and rationalization.

The modeling tool is targeted toward a sophisticated user.

I have been using Enterprise Architect for a year.

Enterprise Architect is stable.

Sparx technical support is good. 

The tool fits best within the IT realm vs Business. I would advise against using the tool when deployed within a collaborative environment with business users.

Our primary use case is related to the architecture around tying the business objectives and values to their maintenance management and asset management system. I'm a digital asset intelligence lead and we are customers of Sparx.  

The company wants to reduce its maintenance budget so the aim is to get more for less. The solution has achieved this and improved efficiency.

Sparx has good functionality to tie back the requirements coming all the way up to the balance score card. The connection is good as well being reusable so you can tweak the system and change different elements in it, which actually cascade down and see the connections with the other elements.

I think the UI could be improved and made a little bit more presentable. I've also found that sometimes finding the track of the information inside can be difficult. All their topics and help are related to each other with one link over the other and it's a bit like going down a rabbit hole and not being able to find your way back. It would be helpful to have some form of infographic showing how these concepts are related to each other. But I also understand that there is a huge amount of information available and sometimes finding the proper tool is not easy.

I've been using the solution for almost a year. 

I rate the solution seven out of 10. 

We use it for data modeling, business process modeling, and all kinds of enterprise architecture tasks such as DoDAF, ArchiMate, SysML, and UML. We do a lot of data modeling, model transformation, and GIS modeling with it. 

We are using its latest version.

There are a couple of things. Price is one thing, but we also like the scriptability of it. We got into scripting it and automating tasks with it, and it is super duper easy to do and helpful. The API has improved over the years. We automate everything, and I love the automation aspects of it.

Its documentation is not 100% perfect, but it is good enough. It is powerful, but because it is so powerful, it is sort of arcane.

It took me a while to figure out how to use the report generation features effectively. So, it would be really nice if they had a way to make that a little bit more interactive and a little bit more straightforward.

Something that is a little bit annoying is that the changes that you make to models are instant and permanent. So, you have to be careful with what you do, and you should do a backup or have some kind of a version control scheme in there. I'm used to Word where you can hit Control+Z and undo what you just did. It is not quite that way in Enterprise Architect. There are cases where the model changes, so you got to be careful with what you do before you change the model.

I set up our Pro Cloud Server literally last week. I've used EA for 10 years or more.

I don't think I've ever had it crash before.

They're amazing. They're a great company. All my interactions with them have been outstanding. So, they're good.

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

EA is extremely easy to set up and use once you know what you're doing. You really do need to have some kind of an overview from someone to get it started. They have good online tutorials, so you can get going. It is pretty easy to get going.

It is cheap.

I am about to do testing of interoperability between EA, System Architect, and a few other things. I'll be really interested to see how the ins and outs of sharing artifacts between those two capabilities work.

I would advise others who are looking into implementing EA to get training. I learned it the hard way. I'm hardheaded, and I just went at it myself, but getting training is going to be a helpful thing on what to do and how to do it correctly. I would learn how to do what you're trying to do before buying a tool to do it. Data modeling is not just about the tool, it is about the actual data modeling itself. So, if you're going to do enterprise architecture, you have to take enterprise architecture training from The FEAC Institute or another institute. Instead of just going right in and using the tool, it is better to be trained. I train my people in what they're doing and not just the tool. They do it way better when I give them the tool.

I would rate Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect an eight out of 10. We do a lot of things with it, and it is a great tool, but no one is a 10.

I want a solution that can interface with Jira and Confluence, both of which my customers have, as well as with that of Bizagi.

A feature I like most about Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect is its ease of use. 

My customers use Bizagi, although I do not. I don't want to change this. What should be improved, however, are the integration capabilities of the solution with Bizagi. 

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. 

Since all the staff is already trained in Bizagi and find it easy to use, I do not wish to change this, but only to load all the processes from it to Sparx. This is my approach. 

The Bizagi model is only for process. It is not an enterprise architect tool. Only Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect, but not Bizagi, allows one to make diagrams and metrics, to examine the relationship between all the elements.

• Data Modeling (conceptual modeling)
• XML schema design
• We use it to develop and maintain the Enterprise Conceptual Model, migrated from erwin a couple of years ago.

We used Sparx EA to document CCAR data lineage in response to an OCC MRA filing.

• Greater OMG UML and XMI compliance
• Better reporting

We have been using this solution for five years.

No problems with stability. It is a rock solid product, unlike erwin, which was unstable.

There were no issues with scalability. It handled increased volume easily, unlike erwin.

I would rate technical support as OK. The forum was great. The actual support was only so-so.

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

The setup was straightforward.

The Corporate Edition, or one of the bundles, is the way to go. You don't save that much going with the personal or profession editions.

We evaluated MagicDraw.

Just get it. My elevator pitch was that it is cheaper than Visio and it provides a common tool and repository for all your development needs. Amazing solution for its price, but has its flaws.

Outside of the diagram and project repository at an affordable prices the actual features included UML and re-engineering to build up documentation on existing code bases and databases for my clients. Later it became the ability to customize and support client and industry frameworks – the tools coverage. Now it is being able to support Enterprise level Architecture across all the domains from business to technology.

XMI Import and Export – allows for rapid extraction of model fragment to support reusable assets and model element transfer to other tools & platforms.

Using the products scripting and namespace management has allowed for the expression of business models (level 1 - 4) for a government agency that provided a ‘tipping point’ for enterprise architecture acceptance. The span of coverage and consistent traceability for view point presentation allows client teams access to continually maintained building block catalogues and alignment with the business models.

More control over diagram layout and stylization and the use of layout templates to allow for consistent model view presentation to consumers. This would include improved control of generated HTML views and SVG products and enhanced shape management.

Tagged value and stereotype management – these two UML features offer a lot of control and flexibility over model element treatment and provide benefit to power users.

Needs support for Executive level diagramming for rolling up details back to concept.

We've been using it since 2001.

We had no issues with the deployment.

The only stability concern I encountered was it not recognising that my laptop has limited resources especially as diagram complexity increases.

We have had no issues scaling it for our needs.

My personal experience is that Enterprise Architect has a large user community that shares well. As well the direct line support from Sparx Systems is consistent; product knowledgeable; seems to be acceptably responsive and works to resolve the identified issue.

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.

Very straightforward – download executable, select repository type, apply the license, and go to work.

Implementation is straight-forward but if this is for a group or large community then having an experienced database administrator and support resources in stewardship roles definitely help. Implementation of product like Sparx Enterprise Architect into Enterprise level Architecture practises usually warrants the establishment of principles practises and procedures to provide governance and support expected results. Tools are only what you make of them.

My ROI was well within the acceptable range for a small engineering firm.

Initially we were able to deploy to 15 end users for less than $5,000. Use of floating licensing provides for acceptable coverage at a lower per user cost.

If you are looking for something to just get the job done that does not box you in, then this product is for you, if you are looking for something more, this product grows with you and can address your incremental needs. If you are looking for a rapid implementation repository for projects that can contribute to an overall enterprise approach I think this product greatly helps with the caveat that it is the basis of a buy and build up approach. Lots of add on lend to the enterprise solution.

The above diagram was the basis as a context for architectural capability for a recent client it covers areas that have been implemented around a Sparx based tool set.

The diagram above demonstrates the product’s ability to support Governments of Canada Strategic Reference Model (GSRM) Services Integration and Accountability Model (SIAM) resulting from GRSM Service Pattern Analysis.

We use it mainly for enterprise and business architecture including application landscape and interface landscape. In some instances, we use it for business processes and roadmapping. 

I am not a big fan of using Sparx. The interface is not user-friendly and is outdated. For example, it is not possible to only open a view you've created or to open one project at a time instead of the entire package.

I'm not looking into expanding the use of Enterprise Architect, but I'm looking into replacing it.

It has been a useful tool for modeling and testing automated processes. 

It would be beneficial to incorporate features like document management usage of video models or PowerPoint visuals that you can import and easily use, instead of having to buy extended modules. When collaborating with other people, it needs to be more user-friendly. I cannot get businesses to use enterprise architect as it is too complicated for them. 

Our organization has used this solution for three years. 

The stability of this solution depends on the availability of the license server. If this connection is set up properly, the stability is okay. It does take a long time to load model projects.

It was straightforward. It involved connecting to the license server and deploying the solution. 

It was deployed within two weeks.

We purchased it once off for 1200 euros. If we want to build integrations with other systems such as Word or SharePoint, we would need to pay approximately 300 euros for this. 

Sparx is a good tool for extended usage such as modeling or automated testing. It allows you to do good testing upfront. If the only intention is to use it for architecture modeling and visuals, it may not be the best solution. 

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.