Item: Lucidspark
Rating: 8
Author: Steve Jackson

Use Cases and Deployment Scope

LucidSpark really shines early on in the design process, when thinking through and collaborating about architecture. It is a great tool for modeling systems at a high level and communicating with others.

Pros and Cons

Systems and architecture collaboration
Communication of intent
Discourages delving too deeply into implementation

Think of LucidSpart as a whiteboard -- Its strengths and weaknesses are similar.
LucidSpark's costs is a barrier for entry for personal use.

Return on Investment

It has provided an easy and agreed upon tool for early collaboration
It has greatly improved team buy-in on design approach before writing code

Usability

LucidSpark meets its design goal of simplicity and should be applauded for that. It forces thinking about ideas - not implementation. However, a few more basic shapes would be nice.

Support Rating

I've not needed support.

Key Insights

Do you think Lucidspark delivers good value for the price?

Yes

Are you happy with Lucidspark's feature set?

Yes

Did Lucidspark live up to sales and marketing promises?

I wasn't involved with the selection/purchase process

Did implementation of Lucidspark go as expected?

Yes

Would you buy Lucidspark again?

Yes

Alternatives Considered

Microsoft Powerpoint and Microsoft Powerpoint Online

Previously, we've used Powerpoint, which isn't bad. LucidSpark integrates better with the other Lucid tools, but Powerpoint has more shapes available which [are] sometimes useful.

Other Software Used

PyCharm, Slack, Atlassian Confluence

Likelihood to Recommend

LucidSpark is great for early collaboration, where implementation detail is a bad thing. We use it, as a policy, before every feature as a team to work through a design approach. Think of it as a whiteboard in a meeting - ideas, not detail, [are] the goal.

Great production, has significantly helped our organization's collaboration; A bit pricey for personal use.

Overall Satisfaction with Lucidspark