We performed a comparison between OpenText ALM / Quality Center and Oracle Application Testing Suite based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Atlassian, Microsoft, Nutanix and others in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites."Templates: Allows us to standardize fields, workflows throughout hundreds of HPE ALM projects."
"This solution is open and very easy to integrate. The interface is good too."
"Having used the tool before, I like the use of parameters, being able to do exports and reports of the data for monitoring of executions, and the defect management as well. I feel satisfaction in that area."
"The initial setup is straightforward. It's not too hard to deploy."
"From reporting to team management, everything is better now."
"Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is a very good test management tool especially for writing test cases and uploading. You can even upload the test cycles from Excel. You get the defects and the reports, and also some automation using EFT which works with ALM."
"I found the ease of use most valuable in Micro Focus ALM Quality Center. Creating test cases is easier because the solution allows writing in Excel."
"The most valuable Quality Center feature, I find, is the solution's integration with some of our automation tools. For us, the ability to capture and record and the ease of use from a user perspective, are all key."
"Oracle Application Testing Suite's most valuable feature is it works very smoothly with all Oracle Java-based applications."
"Has good automation and load-testing capabilities."
"The graphics are very intuitive and it's very easy to get scale of development."
"We like that we don't need a separate management tool. This is a good feature. It also has an inbuilt performance tool which is on Flash. It has very good record and playback feature as well. The inspection tool is also very good. Overall, since it comes with all the three packages, it's very good."
"OpenScript has many features that make it useful, including the ability to record and playback."
"We find the front-end interface of this solution to be very user-friendly, meaning easy navigation even for novice users."
"The function test feature is valuable."
"The most valuable feature is the object identification feature."
"I'd like to see the concept of teams put into it."
"It is not a scalable solution."
"We cannot rearrange the Grid in the Test Lab. It is in alphabetical order right now. But sometimes a user will want to see, for example, the X column next to the B column. If they came out with that it would be useful for us. They are working on that, as we have raised that request with Micro Focus."
"The UI is very dated. Most applications these days have a light UI that can be accessed by pretty much any browser; QC still uses a UI which has a look almost the same for the past 20 years."
"An area for improvement in Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is not being able to update the Excel sheet where I wrote the test cases. Whenever I update some test cases, I'm unsuccessful because there is overlapping data or missing cases from the sheet."
"Is not very user-friendly."
"ALM requires that you install client side components. If your organization does not allow admin rights on your local machine, this means you will need someone to run the installation for you with admin rights. This client side install is also limited to Internet Explorer and does not support any other browsers."
"I would like to be able to search easier, not just do SQL queries, being able to do free keyword searches on the data. That's valuable."
"The pathfinding at times is slow when we are using it. The tool's performance can be improved."
"Oracle Application Testing Suite does encounter some lag. When I am trying to record something, the tool gets stuck."
"I have faced issues with some indexing items."
"The dashboards need to be simplified and made more user-friendly."
"Oracle Application Testing Suite could improve by offering desktop-based application automation. It is lacking in this area at the moment."
"I would like to see better dashboards."
"If there's a feature we want in OATS that's missing and we report that to Oracle, it takes a long time."
"Lacks patches for new OS systems and doesn't work on a Mac."
More OpenText ALM / Quality Center Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Oracle Application Testing Suite Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText ALM / Quality Center is ranked 6th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 197 reviews while Oracle Application Testing Suite is ranked 9th in Performance Testing Tools with 24 reviews. OpenText ALM / Quality Center is rated 8.0, while Oracle Application Testing Suite is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of OpenText ALM / Quality Center writes "Offers features for higher-end traceability and integration with different tools but lacks in scalability ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Oracle Application Testing Suite writes "Requires little maintenance, is stable, and easy to deploy". OpenText ALM / Quality Center is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, OpenText ALM Octane, Jira, Tricentis qTest and Zephyr Enterprise, whereas Oracle Application Testing Suite is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText UFT One, Apache JMeter, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud and Katalon Studio.
We monitor all Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites 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.