Sparx Systems Forum
Enterprise Architect => General Board => Topic started by: Tom2 on December 03, 2002, 02:43:07 am
-
Help me!
I work for a company and I try to find a good modeler UML tool. I think Enterprise Architect is particularly interesting. Of course the problem is that Sparx Systems isn't as important as Rational for instance! So, I want to convince my company that we needn't Rational Rose, and that Enterprise Architect is a good product. In order to make that I have to find information about Sparx Systems (capital, number of people, number of sold licences, clients...this kind of information).
Thanks a lot for your answer
-
Hi,
I'll let Geoff decide if he wants to answer this but with over 20+ years in software and as a former RVP for CA and one of the original team members of Clipper, a few brief thought.
Sparx is MORE important that Rational, not less. Their attitude to a) support and b) upgrading their produce to be current on a regular basis is FAR more than what I can say for Rational. Now, if you mean by "important" that their have a HUGE MARKETING program, INFLATED licensing agreements, and CORPORATE SALES reps all over the place, then okay... they have that. But then again, so did RBase, QuatroPro, Quark, Frameworks, Aston Tate, yadda yadda, and the list could go on. I've found that MEDIOCRE/CRAPPY products can have the best MARKETING arm to overcome the shortcomings of their product. That, too me, doesn't make for good software development, modeling, designing, et cetera. And without the best tools, our software using those tools can not be "the best". The trickly down theory at work I suppose.
I also hope that you are actually comparing ROSE to EA and not the "suite" of Rose to EA. The first is comparable; the last is not. I'm sure you can do a purely _technical_ comparison of the two and draw that conclusion as well amd EA will beat Rose. When PRICE, SUPPORT, FREE UPGRADES FOR A YEAR, and (this last point is CRITICAL) Sparx bend-over-backward approach to listen to the users and offer feature enhancements based on OUR REQUESTS, then there is no compariosn. Rose and the "corporate mentality" behind Rational falls woefully short of the mark. But if you're looking for slick sales people, if your management team wants to be wined-and-dined at free lunches, if they like glossy handouts, and if they think that paying MORE MUST mean it is better, then Rose comes ahead.
As far as capital, number of people, number of sold licences, et cetera... I understand the RATIONAL behind the question but frankly, it's none of anyone's business IMO (no offense being given here... just an opinion). That same thing was done against Nantucket and we just kept sticking to 3 major principles to our product "Bigger, Better, and Faster". At the time, Ashton Tate was huge and we weren't and while in the beginning we weren't "approved software", over time we came to be because of those three principles... and not because of "the numbers". Also, consider the dozens of support people at Rose who can't answer a question; the number of programmers that can't update products (like RequistePro), and the number of sold licences that just sit on the shelf because of awkwardness of use, inability to get the job done, and support that is anything but... then you'll see I hope that the requested numbers don't mean very much.
Finally, unless Sparx is a publicly traded company, those numbers are NOT "public" in nature. Unfortantely some corporate minds think they mean something to the quality of the product or the longevity of the company. Well, those numbers mean nothing. Here's just ONE example. I know a TON of people who gave ASK/Ingres high marks for those types of numbers and now know they didn't mean very much the day after they were sold to CA... and CA has all of those types of numbers you want. In short, it's the Software, Support, and ROI that should mean MORE to the decision making process than anything else. All the capital, number of people, number of sold licenses, clients and et cetera don't mean a hill of beans if the SOFTWARE doesn't do the job. That's the issue, IMO.
Just my .02 worth...
Steve
-
Hi Steve,
I knew that your name was familiar and now I remember I read one of your Clipper books way, way back when I did a spot of Clipper programing (even taught a Clipper course once).
Basically I agree with every word, comma and full-stop of your comments.
I have seen estimates suggesting that up to 60% of the cost of software bought from a large vendor is pre-sales. In other words, if you actually buy the product, you pay for the glossy brochures, slick sales people's visits and free lunches supplied to all the people who DID NOT BUY THE PRODUCT.
I am guessing that Sparx's pre-sales percentage is much, much smaller than 60%.
You decide!
Phil
-
G'day,
Well put Steve, particularly "the Software, Support, and ROI ... mean MORE to the decision making process than anything else."
Aside from the financial case to adopt EA, EA has a zero risk factor. EA exports models to XMI standard... export your models and import into some other tool anytime.
Touchy-feely stuff? The product and the support are outstanding, making for a VERY happy user community. Happy people are more productive, and produce higher quality stuff... :D
-
I couldn't bold/italic anything if my rear-end depended on it.
Hope y'all can still take my 2 cents somewhat seriously.
-
Phil,
I knew that your name was familiar and now I remember I read one of your Clipper books way, way back when I did a spot of Clipper programing (even taught a Clipper course once).
Thanks, I'm glad you remembered... I try to forget sometimes when I look back <ROFL>.
Your comments about the pre-sales stuff is VERY VERY True. As RVP-level of Pre-Post Sales of Field Services at CA for the entire SE region here, I got to see that first hand. The CA model of buying companies and then up-selling to their installed base is well known. Their high price points is well known. The sales staff hammering on corporate buyers and "decision makers" is well known. Their less-than-adequate software, not moving development on purchased software companies, and their multi-tiered level of non-support is also well known. Rational follows these points is also well known. Frankly, I'm glad to see Geoff and crew around... it reminds me of the good-old days like Nantucket... where trying to make money by being the best is the only important issue.
Oh, Phil... don't pre-judge EA-ReqPro... we're using VO for this first release before moving over to C# and .NET <lol>.
Cheers,
Steve
-
Jason,
I couldn't bold/italic anything if my rear-end depended on it.
Hope y'all can still take my 2 cents somewhat seriously.
I'll take more than those .2 cents... well said and I totally agree!
Cheers,
Steve
-
All I can speak to is this:
I've used both. I've model with both. I've been doing architecture for 15 years.
FOR THE MONEY, you can not beat Enterprise Architect. While there are many items in Rose and yes, it is feature rich, its around $4000 for 1 copy. The company I work for bought 1 Rose license -- then we had to buy 1 'code generator' for EACH language (C# and VB6). I wanted something for my self so I found EA. I've used it for 6 months and love the features. I did several projects for our company and delivered the results using EA. The company was -- well their jaws dropped! Because of 'seeing is believing', the company bought 6 copies -- and now, its our standard because of the work it is capable of.
Now support -- you will NOT get Rose to make changes or work with you when you have issues AT lighting speed! Geoff and his team are just unbelievable!
I'd suggest you use the tool on a project and prove to them (like I had to) what the tool can do. I did a training session for our company today on the virtues of the tool -- they are totally hooked!
BUY it. Most companies just do make an effort because they think they need to spend hundreds or thousands of dollars for a single copy. NOT the case here...
It is an awesome tool with great support -- that's what I want when I buy a tool...
-Donald Hamm
Chief Scientist
Acceleration Technologies Inc.
-
Hi all,
Appreciate the comments that have been posted so far. However, as someone currently evaluating EA - I do find the "About Us" section on Sparx's website to be very limited. All they give is their contact details and some dates for establishment etc.
I'm not really looking for financial information about the company - but I would at least like to know who the main people in the company are - and a bit of background info on them.
This is pretty standard info for a company to put on their website and allows potential customers to get a "feel" for the company. Even my Google searches so far have turned up nothing about the company - no press reports - nothing.
I'm a little disappointed that no-one from Sparx has responded to this thread. However, so far I am very impressed with EA and may well end up purchasing despite the lack of info about the company. At the price, it's probably worth the risk. But I do wonder how many sales they are missing out on simply because they don't provide some basic background info about the company on their website.
Hope this is taken in the vein of constructive criticism that it is intented to be.
Regards
Murray
-
Murray,
I understand the driving issues you have expressed but I don't think a detailed "About Us" web page would resolve anything. CA has an investor's page and a detailed history page and I don't know anyone on here with pleasant experiences with that company (just siting one for an example AND as a former RVP) nor do I know anyone RUSHING to buy any of their products. And I'm talking about a 6 Billion Dollar company with over 17K employees!
Sparxr product, support, and dedication throughout the years expressed by others on here speaks LOUDER than any self-made marketing blurb on a web page. That's just my opinion and I have often been wrong!
Maybe their way of doing business doesn't require the "corporate" press report, high google presence, et cetera. As a potential customer I would hope that the resounding support and open communication on this board addresses that far better than any slick glossy could ever do!
<<I'm a little disappointed that no-one from Sparx has responded to this thread.>>
Maybe they feel we, their users, have done an adequate job and there is no need for them to enter the fray.
<<However, so far I am very impressed with EA and may well end up purchasing despite the lack of info about the company.>>
Again, the product and the support (and okay, the price) says it all to me.
<<But I do wonder how many sales they are missing out on simply because they don't provide some basic background info about the company on their website.>>
You raise an interesting point but that's for them, I feel, to consider. Hell, if I could be a company of just 1 and had a product with their support and if I could make a nice living with just one product and just being a lone developer, I would in a heart beat! Samson found out that size doesn't matter.
I think that once you buy the product you'll find the level of support FROM ALL OF US to be an oasis of pleasure from the corporate environment of software overpricing, customer non-support, and less-than-adequate software tools for development.
That's just what I've experienced and I've only felt that way about one other product in over 20 years.
Cheers,
Steve
-
Oh, Phil... don't pre-judge EA-ReqPro... we're using VO for this first release before moving over to C# and .NET <lol>.
Steve
Steve,
Not quite sure what I said that gave the impression I pre-judged EA-ReqPro except perhaps its omission from my list of suggestions for requirements management tools.
If so, I didn't mean to create that impression. I was listing stuff that I have had some experience with and look forward to evaluating your product on my next project.
But for the time being, were's that beer...
Phil.
-
However, as someone currently evaluating EA - I do find the "About Us" section on Sparx's website to be very limited. All they give is their contact details and some dates for establishment etc.
I'm not really looking for financial information about the company - but I would at least like to know who the main people in the company are - and a bit of background info on them.
This is pretty standard info for a company to put on their website and allows potential customers to get a "feel" for the company.
Hi Murray,
Lets be perfectly honest. Given that Sparx is a small, innovative company, I can only see their corporate profile being used as an argument against a purchase decision by corporate management. Better to say nothing that to give the other guys amunition.
I downloaded EA. Evaluated it. Read postings on this forum. Made an informed decision to use the product.
If organisations can't/won't work that way then let them suffer the financial and productivity loss.
I contrast, I recently sat through a glitzy presentation by a large vendor. Utter rubbish! Most of the content focussed on the personality cult of its founders, slagging off its competition and basically what good guys they were. I also detected a fair amount of half-truths and bare-faced lies! (To avoid misunderstandings I will state quite clearly that the company involved was not Rational).
It really is up to the customer to decide which type of vendor they wish to deal with...
Phil.
-
Phil,
LOL... I'm sorry my friend, I wasn't clear... I was asking for an open mind because of the language we're using. Very Clipper-esque <LOL>. Nothing more.
Now who's turn is it for that beer???
Cheers,
Steve
Steve,
Not quite sure what I said that gave the impression I pre-judged EA-ReqPro except perhaps its omission from my list of suggestions for requirements management tools.
If so, I didn't mean to create that impression. I was listing stuff that I have had some experience with and look forward to evaluating your product on my next project.
But for the time being, were's that beer...
Phil.
-
By the way....
FWIW, I just did a google search on "UML Tool" and EA came up as the 17th item (on the second page) and ahead of Object By Design tool, Metamill, and almost just before VisualUML.
I then typed in "UML Modeling Tool" and what to my wonder did I see off to the right in "SPONSORED LINKS" was Sparx and Enterprise Architect.
I then typed in "UML Tool with support and full features" and Sparx was 4th and RATIONAL didn't show up until the 8th page and I stopped looking for Togethersoft. Not sure if that means that neither Rose or Togethersoft offer "full features" and/or "support" or both... <LOL>.
Of course when I searched for "I want a free BMW", Sparx and Enterprise Architect didn't show up at all in the result set. Drats!
Cheers,
Steve
-
Steve and Phil,
You make some fair points. As I said - I am very impressed so far with EA. And yes - I am much more interested in hearing your experiences with the product - and your experiences with support from the company - than in glossy market-droid speak.
Still - I wouldn't mind knowing a little about Geoff's background. It doesn't bother me in the slightest if EA is a small company - just makes me all the more impressed with the product. But - forgive me for being presumptive - it appears to me like Sparx are avoiding this issue. That's their perogative of course - I'm just trying to give some constructive feedback.
Murray
-
Murry,
Again, why should Geoff and crew enter the fray when we're doing a good job supporting their product, their service, and their company. How many times have you never heard from the head of a company or a government when the message that would be conveyed be done by others. I know I wouldn't.
Steve
-
G'day folks,
I can see Murray's point. There are technologically-inept managers, accountants, purchasing officers, etc., who may have the final say in adopting a product, and who may evaluate a product solely based on the maker's web site. Sparx systems may be losing out on some extra sales, and some software development folk may have no choice but to work with inferior products because they have no say.
Maybe for Sparx's benefit, and maybe for the benefit of those folk out there who can't convince management to think out of the box a little, it would be worth having a professional, slightly flashy "About" screen.
For an "About" box, I'd say sugar coat it a little with things like "200% increase in sales (or market share) since ..." or a few success stories like "EA used on project XXX for company YYY".
If it ain't too much work to setup and to update once in a while, then it may sway those blockheads who really shouldn't have any say in picking software to start with.
-
Jason,
I never said I didn't understand his points, I STRONGLY feel they are strawman issues. There are inept managers all over the place and no matter what you do or do not, you will loose out on some extra sales. Frankly, it's none of our business... it's Sparx business if THEY feel it is an issue. A web site or a HELP ABOUT page or jumping in here does NOTHING to increase sales... a huge sales force taking those "inept" managers out to lunch does MORE to the sale. BUT, if that is not Sparx business model, then that's THEIR business.
Come on people, let's stick to our business plans and our products and out models, and not try to run or make someone else's.
Steve
-
Hi all,
I'll endeavour to get something posted in the "About Sparx" section that is a bit more informative in the next day or two.
Many thanks to all those who have offered support on this thread - much appreciated.
We have indeed experienced excellent growth and market acceptance over the last two years - and with a rapidly expanding user base and continuing good feedback on EA's capabilities and performance it should not be too difficult a task.
Thanks again for the feedback, Ill post again on this thread when the information is available.
Geoff Sparks
-
Whoa Steve,
Wasn't replying to you personally, and wasn't putting any words in your mouth either, so to speak.
I just thought this was a good philosophical discussion ... an opportunity to ramble on with other folk about some of the crappy realities in our worlds, and an opportunity, as a big-time fan of EA, to theoretically discuss what could facilitate the health and longetivity of EA (or any business in general, for that matter) and to discuss those things that may hamper it.
Of course it's none of our business how Sparx Systems does things (to be honest, I appreciate how they do things), and really how can anyone of us expect that we can push anybody else to do things we want them to do. But I don't see how censoring (or wanting to end) this thread of discussion is of any benefit to Sparx, and I don't get why anyone should get a little out of sorts with this thread.
Honestly, if you think this thread is futile and pointless, then let the rest of us have our pointless discussion, and for your own sake move on.
Murray, do everything you can to convince whoever to go with EA. None of you will be disappointed. There is nothing to lose. Knowledge is power.
-
Whoa back Jason,
I didn't take anything personally, but that's the trouble with 2 dimensional communication.
Information is great and I certainly don't believe in censoring. I don't know what EVER gave you that idea! I just see this thread similar to those threads on CompuServe and "The Source" back in the 80's. One of the nice things about CA is that I learned it's about making money and we all individually have to spend alot of time keeping focus on that. Maybe that's why I stopped writing books and all.
As far as the health on EA, well... personally speaking we're trying to do something about it which I'll outline next week. I do believe that the discussion on a formal UP process... one that generates LOTS of White Papers and the like... do ALOT more towards ensuring the health of EA than this thread. For example, companies have bought into the RUP concept (even though they don't follow it OR they give lip service to it only to cut corners when it comes ot RUP implementations, but that's a different issue). If we could put lots of things like that together, then companies will see those types of things they have become accustomed to as opposed to open discussions. For example, the tutorial I started to put together... maybe I'm stupid or niave but I felt that that type of effort would go a greater distance to ensuring EA's success then anything else I could do at the time. Of course, we moved on to testing other things with EAToolkIT and soon, with EA-ReqPro.
The point is I know emotions and passions and believes are strong and hell, I want to see that continue. But there are concrete things we can do far more effectively than discussions (IMO).
Steve
-
Yeah, ditto on the two-way communicate thing.
Gotta admit, though, that some no-brainer activities/discussions and blowing off some steam once in a while feels pretty good. Can't do concrete things all of the time, eh?
-
lol... you got that right my friend... that's why I play Monopoly on line or Bridge when I feel like thinking <LOL>...
Yeah, ditto on the two-way communicate thing.
Gotta admit, though, that some no-brainer activities/discussions and blowing off some steam once in a while feels pretty good. Can't do concrete things all of the time, eh?