OpenText Software Delivery Management Reviews

We use OpenText ALM Octane as a Quality Hub within our development cycle. It meets our strict audit requirements, particularly those mandated by Dutch Bank for the financial sector.

OpenText ALM Octane is a new product with full development ongoing, where new ideas are launched regularly. Its ability to generate audit evidence with a single click is a significant advantage, as it saves considerable time and money compared to manual processes. This efficiency is especially valuable for audits required by financial regulators.

There is room for improvement in OpenText ALM Octane's flexibility. While it aims to be as flexible as possible for a large enterprise application, sometimes there are limitations that may not meet specific organizational needs. Furthermore, support can always be improved.

We have been using OpenText ALM Octane for almost four years.

OpenText ALM Octane is a stable product without any issues related to latency or performance.

There are always potential limitations with scalability, but OpenText ALM Octane is currently scalable enough for our needs. We can expand the number of servers and resources as required.

We have a very direct line to support and frequently communicate with OpenText's R&D about ideas and resolving issues. However, customer support can always be improved as there is always some room for enhancement.

The installation of OpenText ALM Octane is relatively straightforward compared to other products like Quality Center. However, we need to install additional components such as ElasticSearch, which adds complexity.

We experience significant time and money savings with OpenText ALM Octane. The ability to generate audit evidence with a single click saves ten days of work for ten people, enabling them to focus on other tasks. Quantifying precise ROI is challenging because it depends on end-user usage.

OpenText ALM Octane is an expensive product. However, it offsets costs by saving time and money, thus creating a balance between expenses and benefits. Our organization with over 1500 users sees savings and ROI.

Overall, every product can be improved, and OpenText ALM Octane is no exception. There is room to enhance flexibility, scalability, and support. We do not use AI features due to regulatory restrictions from the Dutch government. I would rate the overall solution as an 8 out of 10.

I have used the solution in my company since we were developing a training information system.

In terms of how the tool has helped improve our company's workflow or how our organization functions, I would say that we have had the CI/CD pipeline going in and doing the development. We would also do the testing, specifically manual testing.

The tool's price is high, making it an area where improvement is high.

I have been using OpenText ALM Octane for over twenty years.

It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

It is a very scalable solution. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution an eight out of ten. Only a handful of people used the tool in our company. We probably have about 30 users.

I never had to use the solution's technical support. If some problems appear in the tool, my team solves them.

I stopped using Micro Focus. IBM, who is the developer for our company, uses OpenText ALM Octane.

I rate the product's initial setup phase a ten out of ten.

I am not on the developmental test team, and it was done on a contract basis. I work in the government as a PMSS contractor, so we do operational testing. We weren't involved in the tool's setup and product configuration.

The solution is deployed on an on-premises model.

The tool's price is extremely high. When I was using Micro Focus, there were ten licenses, costing around 1,38,000, which was outrageous.

I started off with Micro Focus, and I think it was a failure since I did not like the test scripts that were generated. Everything was like a Word document, while a lot of people liked Excel files with images, which is a major reason why we are moving from OpenText ALM Octane and going with Tricentis qTest Manager.

With OpenText ALM Octane, the development team didn't have enough licenses, so they were being kicked out every few minutes. I have not really worked extensively with our development team at all except for going in and pulling my test cases and verifying the defects. Most of my work was related to HP Quicktest Professional and Micro Focus ALM, which were used to meet all my requirements, like in the area of traceability.

To others, I can say that they need to pick a tool that suits their development process best. I spent almost twenty years using OpenText ALM Quality Center, so I knew it inside and out. Going with ALM Octane, I saw how it is a totally different piece since it has a lot of nuances that you have to get familiar with in the long run.

I rate the tool a ten out of ten.

My company has several scrum teams, so we use OpenText ALM Octane for sprint planning. My company also uses OpenText ALM Octane for test management, quality management, requirements management, deployments, engineering purposes, and some automated testing.

The most valuable feature of the solution is that it is a one-tool solution, meaning you have everything you want in one tool, so you don't need to switch to other tools.

I think the area of release management in the tool is an area of concern where improvements are required. In general, the connection between releases and scrum teams needs improvement, as it could be optimized owing to its linkages, making it very uncomfortable as soon as you have strong teams or scrum teams that work with different items over several releases.

In future product releases, the solution needs to focus a bit more on the metric part. The product's dashboard is a metric for productivity and process control.

I have been using OpenText ALM Octane for four years. I use the solution's latest version.

It is a very stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

I don't see any limitations in the product's scalability. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

There are more than 1,000 users of the product in my company.

The solution's technical support team is responsible and helpful, but in our company, we don't require much help in relation to the product as we are able to manage it by ourselves. The solution's technical support is good.

I have experience with different tools, especially Microsoft. I have experience with different tools, especially Microsoft. My company switched to OpenText ALM Octane from Microsoft as it is considered to be a single solution for every use case.

The product's initial setup phase was straightforward.

The solution is deployed on an on-premises model.

The time for the product's deployment phase is something that depends on how much of the product a user wants to use. In my company, we actually indulge in the product's onboarding process team by team and project by project, meaning it's not about just implementing the product all the time but moving in a step-by-step manner.

Around ten people who take care of administration and engineering areas in our company take care of the deployment and maintenance of the product.

I would say that it is an affordable product. There is an annual service fee, which is one of the additional payments to be made apart from the standard licensing costs attached to the solution.

I recommend the solution to those who plan to use it.

I really like the progress made by OpenText ALM Octane since I have seen many features being introduced lately. I believe that there are still some features left to be introduced in the solution. I would be happy to see some new features in the product. I would like to see the product offer some optimization to users, along with some improvements in terms of metrics and dashboards.

I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten.

We are using Micro Focus ALM Octane for agile purposes and integration with ALM.

The most valuable feature of Micro Focus ALM Octane is the reports. We are able to do customization.

The solution should improve by adding scrum board-like functionality.

I have been using Micro Focus ALM Octane for more than one year.

I rate the stability of Micro Focus ALM Octane an eight out of ten.

We have 14 people using the solution in my company. We might increase our usage of the solution depending on the project we have.

I rate the scalability of Micro Focus ALM Octane a nine out of ten.

I rate the support from Micro Focus ALM Octane a nine out of ten.

Positive

I have used Jira previously.

The deployment of the solution can take approximately four hours. However, it depends on the environment. The solution can be integrated with GitHub.

I rate the initial setup of Micro Focus ALM Octane a seven out of ten.

We used an integrator for the deployment. We have three people involved in the deployment.

The price of Micro Focus ALM Octane is too high compared to other solutions.

I recommend using the free version before purchasing. 

I rate Micro Focus ALM Octane an eight out of ten.

In my company, I don't specifically work on OpenText ALM Octane, but my team works on it. My company uses OpenText ALM Octane as a test management platform.

Since I work for a software company, we use it for the management of test scenarios, how many tests to run against certain features, what are the test results, how long the resolutions or the fixes take, and when we can stop testing the features. The product helps in terms of collaboration and coordination between different teams.

The most valuable features of the solution are its ability to manage test scenarios, test results, and test automation, which are its primary functionalities.

Improvement-wise, I think that the tool needs to be made more flexible and easy to integrate with the rest of the tools in the SDLC ecosystem. There are some challenges when we want to integrate the tool with other products, and it takes time for a team to figure out how to do it.

I have experience with OpenText ALM Octane for a year and a half. I am a customer of the solution.

It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

I haven't seen any significant requirements in my company regarding the scalability aspect of OpenText ALM Octane.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution an eight to nine out of ten.

Around 250 people, consisting mostly of QAs and software engineers in my company, work on the solution.

I rate the technical support a seven out of ten.

Neutral

I rate the product's initial setup a seven on a scale of one to ten, where one is difficult, and ten is easy.

The solution is deployed on an on-premises model.

I rate the product price an eight on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive. The product is neither cheap nor expensive.

I don't recall the names of the products my company had evaluated against OpenText ALM Octane in the past. The reason why my company chose OpenText ALM Octane is because we were using Micro Focus in our environment.

I suggest to those planning to use OpenText ALM Octane to ensure that the workflow and the tools that you use can collaborate and integrate with the product.

I rate the overall tool an eight out of ten.

It's for monitoring the application lifecycle for quality and testing in an agile methodology.

The enterprise view for application management has been great.

It’s easy to set up.

Generally, we’d like more adoption of the solution in our industry.

We’d like to see Platform One/Iron Bank compliant containers. These are certifications. Certification for Platform One and specifically for the product ALM Octane, Platform One/Iron Bank certification would be ideal. My understanding is it just so happens that that's the roadmap.

The clients have been working with it for 25 years.

The solution is very stable.

It's extremely scalable. It's an enterprise solution for lifecycle management.

As a rep, I’d always like to increase usage. In general, there's a total direction to increase exposure to ALM Octane.

I have experience with technical support. For secure clients in the US, domestic in-country support is outstanding.

If you're just doing the regular follow the sun, there could be issues with support availability. However, if you use premium in-country support, you won’t have issues.

The product management and the Go Octane support, which is the migration to Octane, which is not an in-country that is now going and leveraging the Go Octane team is also outstanding.

I'm working with them right now with my customers to migrate from their Al Octane. They're right on target, with a lot of cool exposure. Clients have been satisfied.

My clients were using ALM, the predecessor, and due to the cost-effective migration and technical capabilities to leverage an agile framework application solution, Octane was the right choice.

The initial setup is straightforward.

There's a migration SHIFT from ALM to Octane that is straightforward.

I don’t have any specific information about ROI.

There’s such a large investment in scripts built for these. To recreate that content in other products would be a disadvantage economically to pursue once you have the legacy products. It would be very expensive to get a system integrated to do so.

As a partner, we offer perpetual licensing as well as annual or monthly subscription licensing.

I’m not sure how it compares to other products.

There aren’t any additional costs that I am aware of. It may be different with different deployments. However, customers in the security community have their own secure cloud, and so they just install it there.

I've had my customers look at ServiceNow, DevOps AddOn as well as Jira, and Zephyr.

I don't want to limit our sales. However, my clients were ALM customers and they said the best choice coming from ALM was to migrate their projects to Octane instead of moving over to a new platform.

Micro Focus is an English company. We're a small US-based company that is a master reseller for all the Micro Focus products. I sell the product. I'm a vendor.

I’d rate the solution ten out of ten.

I use it to integrate automation jobs from Jenkins, and to document manual test cases to have traceability on our deliverables and OpenText coverage of our requirements.

The integration capability of ALM Octane was very straightforward. We had a supporting team, and they provided us with detailed documentation.

Test reporting and traceability metrics have proven most effective for managing our projects.

Promoting it more could help a lot of projects. It's time-saving and efficient, and I'm sure it will benefit projects with safe implementation in place. 

Octane is a good choice for companies using the safe portal.

I have been using it for three months now. 

It is a stable product. It performs well. 

Technical support has been good so far. They've implemented our requirements on time, with no delays.

I used Rally. 

Rally wasn't easy. The interface was very difficult, and it was hard to have traceability of our work. The UI wasn't user-friendly. From a test management perspective, we couldn't integrate our automation pipeline into Rally. 

We wanted one solution for both automation and manual testing to have a complete picture. Management team also needed easy access to relevant data. 

As a QA, I wanted to see the release details, defect rates, test coverage, and epic coverage for each release. ALM Octane's reporting structure is much better than Rally's. Rally is a bit complex from the UI perspective.

It's an online cloud version. We just had to have user accounts created, and we were all set up. It's been very smooth.

I am not aware of the pricing because it was introduced at an organization level, and we just integrated it into our project.

My organization would have definitely evaluated other options. We've been using ALM for years, at least since I joined three years ago. 

However, we recently acquired a new organization, and they were using Rally, which was difficult to integrate with Jira. So, we switched to ALM Octane.

We definitely use it as our one-stop solution. 

I would recommend it but depends on the specific project and organization needs. But for our project, it suits us well and has resolved a lot of problems. We are quite happy with it.

It's only been three months since we started using it, and there are still many features to explore. For now, I'll rate it a six out of ten because I haven't discovered all the features yet.

The platform's most valuable feature is pipeline integration or continuous integration services. It can fetch insights about various deposit points after synchronizing with Jira, IBM, or other tools. It gives visualization through dashboards and reports updates quickly and easily.

The product's requirements management feature needs enhancement in terms of functionality. Also, the release management feature needs expansion.

We have been using OpenText ALM Octane for ten years.

I rate the platform's stability a ten out of ten.

I have worked with around 400 OpenText ALM Octane customers. It works well for synchronizing data.

We had a good experience working in the support team's R and D department. However, they could provide more technical resolutions.

Positive

We used HPE Micro Focus ALM Quality Center for a significant amount of time. From a competitive point of view, no comprehensive tools could cover ALM functionalities better than HPE and OpenText. Almost 80% of enterprise companies use OpenText as a well-integrated solution. It doesn't require the technical expertise required to work with open-source tools. Also, it provides good support services.

The initial setup process is straightforward. The platform has well-defined, out-of-the-box workspaces and projects incorporating good practice workflows.

The product is highly priced compared to other tools. However, it offers substantial value. There is a distinction between OEM pricing and the final pricing for customers. They could understand the delta between the two and work towards a favorable outcome.

I rate OpenText ALM Octane a ten out of ten. It is a great product considering ETL and DevOps methodologies. It integrates and synchronizes well with other tools as well. I advise others to understand the business requirements before making a purchase decision.

Micro Focus ALM Octane is primarily used for test management, specifically to manage all testware in a single location. It also allows linking requirements to tests and tests to defects, ensuring defects are traced back to their original requirements. With ALM Octane, users can manage requirements, allowing for the execution of appropriate tests on the code. If a defect arises, it can be linked back to the test case and requirement for effective resolution.

Regarding features, the ability to work on the whole life cycle management, especially to manage the whole software testing life cycle, is the most valuable in Micro Focus ALM Octane.

In terms of improvements, it would be beneficial for Micro Focus ALM Octane to have the ability to interface with newer page tools that support DevOps for operations and testing. Currently, Micro Focus ALM Octane is considered an old-world tool in the industry and lacks the perception of being a new-age tool among its customers. Changing this perception is necessary to improve the reputation of ALM Octane in the industry.

I have experience with solutions from Micro Focus since my company has had a partnership with Micro Focus for more than ten years.

It is a very stable tool. The tool has been in the industry for so many years. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

The number of individuals participating in the deployment process varies. Our company provides testing services, employs 34,000 individuals, and many of our clients utilize Micro Focus ALM Octane. This implies that many people use this tool, after considering 34,000 end-users from our company's end who are using Micro Focus ALM Octane.

For deployment, the number of required tech engineers depends on the size of the project. For installation, one or two people may suffice. However, for usage, there will be many others who need to use it.

The tool itself does not require any maintenance. However, it may require customization based on the specific needs of each customer. Workflows may need to be customized to meet the unique requirements of each customer.

It is a scalable solution. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

Since our company uses the tool for a lot of our customers, we get the best and premium support. Also, all our customers get premium support from Micro Focus if they buy the licensing for the tool via our company. I rate the technical support an eight out of ten. I rated it eight since Micro Focus' technical support needs to understand that there could be specific problems with the customer that they need to understand because, at every place, it doesn't work the same way as there may be changes in the workflow or there may be customization requirements. So, it takes technical support time to understand and give a solution to the users.

Positive

I work with QA Testing Tools from Tricentis and Rally by Broadcom. A competition to Micro Focus ALM Octane would be Jira and Visor's combination.

The solution's initial setup process is reasonably easy. On a scale of one to ten, where one is difficult, and ten is easy, I rate the initial setup an eight out of ten, considering its ease of installation.

There are various options to deploy the tool. In the company that I worked for, we did not use much of the tool. We were only providing this tool for our customers. So, mostly the solution was deployed on-premises even though there were options to deploy the solution on the cloud. The deployment process can be carried out in three to four days or a week maximum.

The pricing of the tool falls in the mid-range zone. When you compare it to other similar tools, I would say it's on the expensive side. The licensing costs for the tool are not straightforward and vary based on several factors, such as the volume of licenses, duration, geography, and customer. The price may become lesser if there is a higher volume or longer duration. Therefore, giving a straightforward one-line answer regarding the price is impossible.

I rate the tool's pricing an eight on a scale from one to ten, where ten is very expensive.

My suggestion for those considering the solution would be to first understand their needs. In some cases, this tool may not make sense for smaller organizations. However, for medium or large organizations, using a tool that can provide a lot of value is definitely worth it. Careful consideration should be given to why they need this tool and what they are looking for, as there are now many options available. In the early days, there were not many options for a tool that could link requirements to testing and execution. Now, there are many combinations and smaller tools available. Depending on the organization's needs, they will have to decide whether this solution can help them.

There is a lot of competition, and there are many lightweight tools that are able to do whatever Micro Focus ALM Octane does. The other reason for my rating of the solution is related to some customers' perception of the tool being outdated. Some customers may expect the tool to have the latest features, such as built-in artificial intelligence capabilities. Overall, I rate the solution a six out of ten.

I like the fact that you can use it on top of Jira. 

Let's say for example, that if you have a DevOps team that is used to Jira, they can continue to use any of the Jira solutions and then have Octane layered on top of it from the business buyer's viewpoint to better use it more effectively.

There is no question that everything can improve.

I like their smart analytics; perhaps they should continue to expand and improve there because it's a fantastic start. And I enjoy the testing, especially the automated testing capabilities, so just keep improving on what they have.

I have been working with Micro Focus ALM Octane for one year.

I am reviewing the latest version.

Micro Focus ALM Octane is a stable solution.

Because of HPE's support, I would feel far more comfortable with Micro Focus.

Micro Focus ALM Octane is a scalable product.

We have approximately 500 clients who are using this solution.

They are large enterprises and digital transformation, IT engineers, more business-oriented than DevOps-oriented.

We have not contacted technical support.

We are working with the Hybrid version, but It even extends to on-premises. It is both the on-premises and cloud versions.

The initial setup is straightforward.

I believe it depends on the circumstance, getting it up and running seems to be rather simple. It appears to be suitable for standing up in a bigger setting.

If I compare it to Jira, for example, and you are in a complex environment, you have to ensure that everything is updated and all of the plugins, and everything works every time there is an update, but you don't have that problem with Micro Focus' Octane.

We received assistance from a third-party consultant.

Because I am making recommendations for a client, I lack firsthand deployment experience. I am merely talking to them and assisting them in making decisions.

My clients have seen a return on investment. I can't quantify it for you, but they believe that because it is cohesive and can be used across the enterprise in a simplified manner, it reduces the total cost of ownership, which might be translated into a return on investment.

In my opinion, it's good value for the price that you pay.

I have some experience with Jira and Micro Focus ALM Octane, but I am mostly reviewing them to give a recommendation for a client.

I would suggest reviewing it thoroughly to make sure that it is a good fit for your environment.

I believe it works well in a variety of settings, but like with any solution, some are more suited to some situations than others. I believe it is trustworthy, reputable, and scalable.

I would rate Micro Focus ALM Octane an eight out of ten.