We performed a comparison between iServer and LeanIX based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Enterprise Architecture Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."iServer has valuable features for workflow and document management."
"This is a flexible tool compared to some other solutions."
"The product has a valuable customized model."
"iServer is a solution that helps catalog enterprise architect solutions and catalog information."
"The solution has wide use within Microsoft products. The integration with Microsoft products, and, in particular, Microsoft Office, is great."
"The initial setup is easy."
"Tech support is very responsive. They solved issues within a prompt response time."
"Integrating the Microsoft documents to the product and visualization matrix where we can see the end-to-end relationship of the network is of great importance to our company."
"The solution has a very useful assessment tool that automatically populates from input data to produce a detailed analysis of customer's environments."
"Ease of use is the most valuable feature. From an enterprise architecture perspective, it's not too cumbersome with too many functionalities, yet it has a lot of attributes for the content it covers."
"The ability to import data and generate reports from it. That's where its power lies."
"The most valuable features are that it's user-friendly and the user experience. It's easy to map the fact sheets."
"The usability is very high. It almost looks like a Facebook for Enterprise architecture, it's pretty nice. It's HTML5 based. The repository is very easy. It has 10 different ways of sorting the objects you have in your architecture repository. Maintaining new data or to add data to your repository is very easy."
"It offers neat visualization and referencing functionality while enabling the creation of landscape maps and showing the relationship between different applications."
"The solution provides a single window view of business, application, data, and technology views of the IT ecosystem."
"The most valuable feature would be application portfolio management, which is where they came from, but over time, they have got artificial intelligence. They built up a very good repository. If I identify a system by name, from historical information, oftentimes, they can tell me that this is deployed with this number of CPUs and they can give me a really good profile of the application for me to put it into a change management database with very little effort."
"Enhancing integration options with ERP or ITSM-related solutions for triggering automated requests for process definitions, changes, and tracking them in the iServer."
"Cannot see which activities are control activities."
"The modelling needs improvement, specifically forecasting capabilities and scenarios."
"The migration tool needs to be included in the main package, and not as a separate license."
"More visualization techniques and ways to report the data might be helpful."
"Requirements management needs to be improved."
"The performance is slow, which is something that should be improved."
"There could be features for process mining, process simulation, and analytics."
"Not a ten because you always have that gap between complexity and easy to use. And the more complex the tool becomes, the more difficult it is to get the usability."
"Does a poor job of being able to allocate detailed costings to components within the network."
"LeanIX has limited in-build diagramming capabilities, requiring the purchase of another tool. That is the main drawback of LeanIX because they don't have a built-in add-on product for diagramming."
"Report generation could be more detailed. There are some shortcomings when creating reports. We can't create tag-based reports or go beyond basic technical reports."
"They're probably positioned pretty well. I hope that they would not focus that much on the business architecture, and they would focus more on the overall cloud strategy and how we can leverage multi-cloud and transition back and forth from other cloud providers. With a lot of current vendors, you get locked in with one cloud, and then you try to migrate to someone else, and it becomes very problematic. What they need to do is to look at the overall data strategy, and they probably need to amplify their data strategy, especially around multi-cloud."
"The solution needs to incorporate a data patch tool that moves within and irons data."
"They could include a combination of LeanIX and some modeling extensions."
"I find LeanIX's pricing expensive for the functionality it offers. However, with the acquisition by SAP, the pricing might become more affordable due to scale and tiered application pricing. Currently, it offers different tiers for the first 400 applications: 400 to 600 and 600 to 1,000, making it expensive from a pricing standpoint."
iServer is ranked 6th in Enterprise Architecture Management with 15 reviews while LeanIX is ranked 1st in Enterprise Architecture Management with 18 reviews. iServer is rated 7.2, while LeanIX is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of iServer writes "Enables flexible parameters for any process model and has a valuable document management feature ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of LeanIX writes "Streamlines the process of identifying apps nearing end-of-life or requiring retirement and facilitates informed decisions about app retention". iServer is most compared with Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect, ARIS BPA, Visio, MEGA HOPEX and BiZZdesign HoriZZon, whereas LeanIX is most compared with ServiceNow, Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect, MEGA HOPEX, ADOIT and Avolution ABACUS. See our LeanIX vs. iServer report.
See our list of best Enterprise Architecture Management vendors.
We monitor all Enterprise Architecture Management reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.