Author Topic: Telelogic Modeller? (Read 9394 times)

Thelonius · « **on:** July 30, 2008, 01:09:22 pm »

Hi

This question may be stretching the purpose of this thread / forum but I'm going to see what happens. Please don't flame me.

The free version of Telelogic Modeller - should I even bother downloading it just to see if it's of any value at all?

Have any of you had a look?

From time to time I speak to customers who are considering a modelling tool - some have mentioned this one.

My view is that 'free' probably means 'don't bother'.

Regards

D. Miller · « **Reply #1 on:** July 30, 2008, 07:05:31 pm »

Not if it based upon the "Not free" Telelogic: System Architect. My company has just dropped "System Architect" in favour of EA.

«Midnight» · « **Reply #2 on:** July 30, 2008, 11:11:34 pm »

Regardless, there's no harm in evaluating it.

If the thing suits your requirements then you're done; you will have a no-cost solution that works for you.

Even if it does not, you'll have a useful comparison. Knowing what's out there will help you to decide if features in EA are really what you need. At the very least you'll know what feature requests to make.

Just another 0.02 CAD, since you asked.

David

PS: And no, that's not an inappropriate question in this forum.

salayande · « **Reply #3 on:** July 31, 2008, 02:25:51 am »

The "free tool" was originally a different piece of software from another company acquired by Telelogic. System Architect is a different software and the company will struggle to integrate the two.

The other matter is the ownership of Telelogic (IBM) which has a complete CASE environment built around Eclipse technology. The future of System Architect is uncertain no matter what IBM says to the corporate development community. A lot of people in the community believes that IBM is after current customers of System Architect which they hope to move over to tools like Rational Software tools.

If I were a corporate developer looking for tools, my consideration will cover the lifecycle cost of tools like the IBM Rational tools (As a former user, they are not cheap) and how easy it is to configure the application development environment without requiring IBM consultants costing over 1000 ponds a day in fees.

My advice is, if there is a feature you are missing in EA, send in a feature request.

kind regards

Segun

Kevin G. Watson · « **Reply #4 on:** August 01, 2008, 06:14:42 am »

Hi'ya Segun

I thought it was based on Tau... really very sure; the modeller doesn't come with code engineering, which includes debugging and performance information... so you lose much of the advantage of probes and UML instance debugging.

Isn't SA Rhapsody ( very similiar 'UML Debugging' faciliaties ).

The XMI output can be imported into Tau2 and be rendered with full product support annimation and scenario developement.

Kevin [smiley=2vrolijk_08.gif]

johnm9 · « **Reply #5 on:** August 01, 2008, 11:16:40 am »

Quote

Not if it based upon the "Not free" Telelogic: System Architect. My company has just dropped "System Architect" in favour of EA.

Hi Miller, would you share your experience or reason for dropping "System Architect"? Is that too sophisticated and not required for your company or what? How's your hands-on experience on that?

D. Miller · « **Reply #6 on:** August 01, 2008, 06:51:45 pm »

There were two reasons:

1. On large projects it kept crashing and/or corrupting the model.

2. (This one is a bit brutal, sorry) It was as user friendly as a cornered rat.

It is far easier for new user to get up and running with EA compared to System Architect.

Kevin G. Watson · « **Reply #7 on:** August 02, 2008, 10:03:43 am »

And as dropped out...

I've not spent much time with Rhapsody users, and even the Rhapsody sales team thought it would be easy to 'transform' to the C++ CLR binding Environment. Then off to testing and performance debugging.

The Simulation Environment being available early so you can visually check long ( and short ) running workflow ( Activity Diagrams )... and observe resultant State changes as they occur ( State Chart Diagrams ). Luckily Visual C++ v9 comes with a signle inheritance transform and native compilation to C++ CLR Executable or DLL Assemby.

Kevin

How many folks have actually got CS2c to work ( Sequence to Collaboration Diagram)... let alone the Java Debug trace (((( Happy note, I've seen the results from a .Net Framework 2 ( and 3 I think) trace )))).

And just when is the MDG thingie for State Machines ( Realtime might be more than that, but state is a good starting point) gonna come out of private beta ( Like most EA User are 'realtime' anything. ). slouching away in their 'deep green' eddifices.

Kevin
[smiley=2vrolijk_08.gif]

salayande · « **Reply #8 on:** August 02, 2008, 08:55:32 pm »

Guys,

We also dumped Telelogic SA for the following reasons:

1. The user interface of the Information Engineering Workbench (IEW) based on a pre-windows operating system (GEM) fared better than Telelogic's System Architect's interface.

2. The version 10.4 at the time of review did not model and generate XSD Schema but DTD. We could not do a round-trip development XSD for SOA type integration projects.

4. There was no support for ISO 11179 or ISO 15000. UNCEFACT UMM was invisible to Telelogic. Despite its involvement in Archimate methodology work, it had no product Add-In for this at the time of evaluation.

5. Its support for TOGAF and Zachman frameworks was screen-deep and so was unintelligent.

6. The in-house technical support team found out that it required levels of security access to databases that we could not allow on our estate.

7. Telelogic SA had been in the industry for a long time but could not come up with a solution for business concept discovery and terminology research based on text mining.

I could simply continue but I have dash off somewhere.

kind regards

Segun

johnm9 · « **Reply #9 on:** August 03, 2008, 12:27:55 am »

Thank you very much. Your feedback are very useful.

Segun, which tools have you finally adapted?

Miller, how large is your EA that start making System Architect crash?
Our company has around 218 interconnecting systems. How does it compare with your scale?

Kevin G. Watson · « **Reply #10 on:** August 04, 2008, 09:37:40 am »

Not a clue, dude

But I think he mean Rhapsody's IDE thing.... Telelogix brought them up a couple years ago.... fancy that... swimming with the blue now.

Hugely large and unenvisioned.... a Blue in the free, ADOPTING EA cos it crashed and EA don't crash.... and so much Rational Software Modeller namoculture expression... hardley typical

And Modeller can be used to check youre analysis results... so really it's a work stage modify engine, attached to a C++ simulation runtime.

Kevin

aquadolph · « **Reply #11 on:** August 06, 2008, 11:05:24 am »

There are two versions of Telelogic Modeler. One is based on Tau for IT development and the other on Rhapsody for embedded systems development. Both offer the ability to model with diagrams but no code generation. For that you need the purchase versions but if you are only interested in modeling then you can't beat the price.

Thelonius · « **Reply #12 on:** August 06, 2008, 01:48:12 pm »

Quote

...A lot of people in the community believe that IBM is after current customers of System Architect which they hope to move over to tools like Rational Software tools.

If I were a corporate developer looking for tools, my consideration will cover the lifecycle cost of tools like the IBM Rational tools (As a former user, they are not cheap) and how easy it is to configure the application development environment without requiring IBM consultants costing over 1000 pounds a day in fees.

I had access to the full IBM Rational tool set with previous employer. The recent Eclipse-based implementation is a vast improvement over the old Rational interface. And I kind of respect the IBM 'Grand Vision' of having a 'one stop shop' of tools for every possible aspect of the SDLC.

But I use EA only as a 'sketch' tool, not as a 'blueprint' tool. For my needs, EA is just about perfect. After analysis gets beyond a certain level of depth, Visio just doesn't cut it.

What I do find out in the wilds of professional life is that a lot of folk use EA to generate diagrams that are complete and utter rubbish. Not only are they not UML, they're incoherent in any modeling context. That's something that makes me a bit grumpy, actually. Cack-handed whiteboard boxes and lines masquerading - assuming the form of - UML. If you're going to be silly, be silly using Visio, not EA / UML.

Code generation from UML design is not for the faint-hearted. Not for me, certainly. I admire those of you who can make it work at a truly professional level.

salayande · « **Reply #13 on:** August 07, 2008, 03:50:05 am »

Team development without a set of "Rules of Engagement" results in the scenario where the models developed are not communicating modellers intentions.

A shared team Modeling Vocabulary ( actually a Modeling Standards Handbook) that details agreed modeling style is an indispensable tool.

I must confess to having been an IBM Tools fan from the days of KnowledgeWare IEW on OS/2 and the IBM Repository Manager in the late '80s but became disillusioned as time went on. Even then, I cannot deny that in the area of methods, I consider IBM the home of great methods including BSP, Information Engineering and SOMA. I simply have seen nothing exciting coming out of the organization in recent times. But then I suppose a lot of organizations like humans have their lifecyles. The question is where is Sparxsystem in its lifecycle.

Thelonius · « **Reply #14 on:** August 07, 2008, 07:56:33 am »

Quote

The question is where is Sparxsystem in its lifecycle.

Mmm. About half way there, I think.

Sparx Systems Forum

News: