Codebeamer Reviews

We are a solution provider and as a consultant, I have evaluated codeBeamer ALM for some of our clients. One of our clients is using this solution to work on medical products, and we have other clients such as telecoms who provide services.

The features related to metrics are very useful. These are available in other products, but in codeBeamer, they are very simple to use. You can track the metrics in the Agile dashboard very easily.

The connectivity in terms of the lifecycle from inception to end is very good. 

You should be able to combine multiple parameters in a single gadget, and you should be able to retrieve that particular value. For example, if a feature is in support, we want to understand things like how many days it has been there, how many users have searched for it, and so on, for a specific period of time. Being able to track how many days it has been in support is important, but there might be a lot of these different parameters. Having a single value generated would be helpful for tracking.

During the initial setup, I did not see any documentation to assist users with the steps that are required to get started.

I would like to see more, easily trackable reports. Ultimately, I would like to see real-time data, real-time reports, and real-time data analytics.

I have found the technical support to be good, although the length of time you will wait for response depends on the complexity or difficulty of the issue. For simple activities they will do some research and get back to you, and with something of medium difficulty they will take a few extra minutes. However, for complex issues, they will take a lot of time.

I have taken courses on Micro Focus ALM Quality Center, but have not used it for more than two years. I find that codeBeamer ALM is easier to use.

I have also used Jira and I find it to be a very simple tool. If you want functionality then you have to buy other gadgets to do it. Another drawback with Jira is that you have to write SQL queries, which people don't have time for.

I found the initial setup to be easy, but I know these tools very well. I would say that the process is straightforward, although I did not see any documentation. For a new user, they have to follow a lot of steps and it is harder without instructions.

Initially, this product used to be deployed on-premises. For the past four years, it is normally deployed on a public cloud, although for some high-security users, it is deployed on a private cloud. Our customer who works on medical products keeps everything on-premises because they don't want to risk their data being exposed. The telecoms prefer a cloud deployment because with the bulk of their data in the cloud, they have easy access to all of the details from around the globe.

I do not see any problem with the cost. It is reasonably priced and in accordance with the industry standards.

When it came time to evaluate ALM solutions for some of our clients, codeBeamer ALM was the one that we chose. I have implemented small projects for evaluation purposes to ensure that it meets their needs.

Overall, I have about 16 years of experience in Agile processes, and about 10 years of experience with ALM products. I am CSM/CSPO certified and work with Agile a lot, which has put in a good position to evaluate these products.

My advice to anybody who is implementing codeBeamer is to make sure to understand what data is needed from multiple ends. You need to use the concept of data warehousing and BI reports.

I find it very simple and easy to use, but there are several areas in need of improvement.

I would rate this solution a six out of ten.

In my experience, CodeBeamer has been essential for digitizing and managing complex development processes. Its strong requirements management tools have greatly improved our workflow.

One of the most valuable features of Codebeamer is its strong performance, especially as the volume of materials increases. The tool's usability is good, although there's always room for improvement. I appreciate the flexibility of using templates tailored to the company or industry, as starting with the right template can significantly enhance the description of processes. While templates may not always be perfect, they play a significant role, contributing to about 80% of the overall effectiveness.

Certain areas in Codebeamer could be improved, like addressing small issues, glitches, or bugs. Making the platform more open for users would be beneficial, allowing for a richer user experience. Transparency in marketing and clearer communication of the tool's advantages could also be enhanced. From a management perspective, it is crucial to highlight the asset management capabilities, which are valuable for those dealing with budgets.

I have been working with Codebeamer since 2021.

It is generally a stable product with occasional glitches.

The scalability of the product is good.

I found the initial setup of CodeBeamer to be a bit complex. The challenge is in establishing a backbone that considers software, cybersecurity, and their connections to hardware and other components. The existing documentation isn't always clear on these aspects, making it challenging to ensure compliance with automotive standards. To build a solid foundation following a V-model approach, it is crucial to have comprehensive and unified templates. Currently, the tool seems to lack a straightforward representation of its capabilities in addressing these specific automotive requirements.

Overall, I would rate Codebeamer as an right out of ten.

I use Codebeamer for controlling or arranging client modifications, test data, and other tickets.

Utilizing Codebeamer has helped my organization by saving time in our processes.

One valuable feature of Codebeamer is its ability to save time.

Codebeamer is not completely compatible with our internal network setup, which could be improved.

I have been using Codebeamer for about ten years.

I am satisfied with the technical support from Codebeamer. When I create a ticket for an issue, the support engineers try to resolve the trouble.

Neutral

I have not used other ALM tools like Polarion.

I am aware of Polarion but have no experience using it.

I'd rate the solution six out of ten.

The solution often fits our client's requirements quite well.

The solution easily replaces IBM DOORS, which no longer offers maintenance in China.

The solution is perfect for companies in the manufacturing industry. We, for example, use it in the car industry as well as pharmaceuticals.

Overall, it's a very good solution.

The solution has a very small market share in China. It's almost like a startup.

The solution tends to eat up a budget.

The solution needs to be marketed better in China to give it more visibility.

The initial setup is complex.

The manuals and UI are all in English, which makes it difficult for some end-users as it causes a language barrier. There needs to be Chinese documentation and training materials.

I've been using the solution for half a year now.

My experience is largely in pre-sales, so I haven't really dealt with technical support.

However, I will say that documentation in Chinese would go a long way in helping users in terms of understanding the solution.

We also use Atlasia.

The initial setup is not straightforward. In fact, it's quite complex.

We're a reseller and a solution partner.

We generally give the clients the latest version of the solution. Often, we convert a user from IBM DOORS. If they need to replace DOORS I need to get an ALM requirement to them.

I'd recommend the solution. It's not an ideal solution for small companies or internet-based companies. However, it's perfect for industrial customers.

Overall, the solution is quite good and we've really liked it. I'd rate it eight out of ten.

I use this solution for requirement management, task tracking, bug tracking, and change tracking.

Since implementing this solution we have better communication and information exchange with customers.

The most valuable feature is the different kinds of trackers and traceability over all of it, including documents and wiki.

Usability needs to be improved. 

I have been using codeBeamer ALM for 15 years.

Our primary use for this solution is computer-based applications and systems delivered to FDA regulated industries like pharma and biotech.

We use codeBeamer for projects in a very conservative and highly regulated industry, where operations are still primarily based on paper and a mass of documents.

We also provide ALM consultancy and configuration of codeBeamer to others reforming their everyday workflows by offering smooth collaboration, full transparency, traceability, and compliance with the regulations.

CodeBeamer provides full traceability, excellent collaboration, regulatory compliance, and instant reporting with its holistic approach from requirement management to testing. 

Concept, project, DevOps - all covered.

We would like to see more industry-specific features that are tailored to the vertical markets.

We have had no issues with stability.

We use multiple platforms (Windows, Linux, Docker), and have had no scalability issues so far. Developer provides performance test measures for large (more than one thousand users) systems.

Fully transparent, all support cases, feature requests, and product related questions are accessible for all users.

We did not use another solution prior to this one.

The initial setup takes ten minutes, is automatic, and there are no issues.

We implemented this solution in-house, alone.

Clear wins on project collaboration costs spared via codeBeamer.

Pricing is good when compared to similar ALM solutions.

We did not evaluate other options.

I find Codebeamer to be best suited for automotive projects in various automotive companies. It is very economical for medium-sized companies. It finds use cases in small, medium, and large enterprises. However, I strongly recommend it for medium companies.

The key features of Codebeamer include templates and basic structures, most of which are created and readily available for deployment out of the box, reducing deployment time. Additionally, its integration capability is very high, with almost eighty to eighty-five percent of integrations available readily out of the box, minimizing the need for specific integration-related work.

One improvement could be to reduce the system or server requirements. For a client with a medium configuration server, Codebeamer did not work initially until the system was upgraded. Additionally, the drag-and-drop feature has some bugs, as I identified two to three scenarios where it did not work. For tagging or traceability, I cannot update changes in bulk. If terminology changes, modifications must be done manually or by exporting the document to Word or Excel, which is time-consuming.

I have been using Codebeamer for almost six years.

Codebeamer is mostly stable. The performance might slow down if many applications are running together on a single server with Codebeamer. However, running it independently or with a bigger server generally doesn't cause any issues.

Scalability is not an issue. In a project, I have experienced up to 180 licenses running during peak times and as low as ten licenses during downtime without facing upgrade or downgrade issues.

The customer support for Codebeamer is good. I usually receive responses to my emails within 24 hours, and if I raise an issue as high priority, I receive responses in six to eight hours.

Positive

The deployment is straightforward and not a big challenge. Typically, one person is sufficient for deployment within a week, and the project can be kicked off within that time frame, which is normal in my industry.

The solution has produced a return on investment. It has made the certification process much easier and more straightforward.

The solution is fairly priced.

Currently, I have not seen much AI integration into Codebeamer, but I would like to see features related to code traceability, requirement tagging, and missing requirement highlights in future updates. I rate my overall experience with Codebeamer as close to eight out of ten.