As a security Architect and being member of the board of architects at work I interact with all the other architects.
They all seem to have their different views on how to draw and design.
The Infrastructure architect uses Visio, the enterprise architect Archimate, ...
From what I see Archimate is too conceptual for me, visio does not seem the right approach at all as most of the other architects do not use it.
Would love to have your input.
Different horses for different courses!
Although, I'd argue that you could use any of them to create any type of diagram with a few caveats, so it will likely come down to which one you are used to using, as much as what type of diagram you are creating.
As I came from a systems and networking background my go to programme is Visio, while my colleague often just uses PowerPoint! I'll also sometimes use graphical programmes such as GIMP to create parts of diagrams or complete diagrams.
Regardless of what I use it's likely I'll insert the diagram into a document created in Word or PowerPoint (this is the reason my colleague sometimes uses PowerPoint directly).
Also, I'll often take a screen print of the diagram and insert that image into the document instead of inserting the diagram directly so that it maintains its aspect ratio when being resized within the document as some diagrams can be a little temperamental in that regard depending on the programme used to create them - it also stops people changing the diagram easily. (Obviously, if I've used GIMP the diagram will just be an image anyway.)
Additionally, I'd usually convert the diagram/image or the document containing the diagram/image to PDF before sending out to a client anyway to avoid compatibility issues, and make it more difficult for it to be altered.
So whatever programme is used to create the diagram, the final output just ends up as an image inside a PDF anyway.
Interesting question, and it really depends what, which perspectives or views you are coming from:
Within my organisation, we have mandated methodologies, to ensure all teams regardless of whether they are coming software, technical, enterprise, consultant angles - means that each and everyone talks the same language, same approach, same work products, same artifacts and the same outcomes - so that check points can be approved and validated throughout the high level to detailed design stages, regardless of whether your an application developer, cloud architect or a security architect or a storage architect etc.
In terms of tools we have consistent internal tools, which follow the mandated methodology, to get the job done, and to obtain reference architecture, validation, traceability from requirements to proposed solutions or approach etc.
We have hundred's of methodologies, so on complex engagement, we have Methodology Adoption Workshops or MAWs to decide the approach, and what methodologies we should use including the number of work products or artifacts we need to produce to communicate with the client to obtain their approvals.
However, some people advocate the use of https://www.sparxsystems.com/products/ea/editions/professional.html I rather like this tool, when involved in Identity and Access Projects, due to the Business Process Modelling techniques it uses in alignment with UML etc.
I have seen people adopting Power point, word documents, Visio, https://www.omnigroup.com/omnigraffle, and other techniques, including Rational Software Architect. Or especially with some consultants, they like to use tools such as Xmind (https://www.xmind.net/zen/) for mind mapping and exporting the output to illustrate the problem, scope and other items, at the beginning of an engagement and then move into an appropriate tool set to produce the required method work products.
As long as you have a consistent methodology, and can articulate the appropriate work products, within that framework, and can reuse those work products for other engagements, this really helps speed up engagements and understanding between you and the client or the associated team or third parties.
for me it's Visio if I make more technical designs but for high level functional I just use PowerPoint. It's quick and easy. MS products are also common between teams so no need to deploy a new tool. As a sharing platform we use confluence.
See, for me they are just tools to get the work done.
I agree what ever does the job, however do it with discipline and rigor, without this we stand for nothing, especially when someone asks did you consider this further down the track and you are responsible.