If you were talking to someone whose organization is considering No Magic MagicDraw, what would you say?
How would you rate it and why? Any other tips or advice?
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.
I would advise someone considering this solution to do a proof of concept. Ensure that your engineers have training, not just in the tool, but also in the language they're going to language speaking. I would rate it an eight out of ten.
We are the largest MagicDraw user in Hungary. It's good software, but there is little to no market penetration. People don't know about it or use it. Where is the revenue of the software? There has to be more awareness as Enterprise Architects. The design itself is nothing. Design with consulting is something, but design with confirmation and consulting is the real product. This is the message; without confirmation, there is no product. My advice is to import the design into Confluence, put in the effort through discussion, review it, redesign it again, and then it should work. The business is important for MagicDraw, but the vendors are as well. Because I can design, but I cannot sell it, I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.
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.