3SL Cradle vs IBM DOORS comparison

"3SL Cradle's most valuable feature is its flexibility in managing all your needs immediately."

"Rational DOORS' most valuable feature is that you can write any kind of requirement you want."

"Starting to use the solution is pretty straightforward. There isn't too much of a learning curve."

"The solution is stable."

"We have different generations of all products. It lets us select and see unique attributes for each release or generation. You can use attributes to define a selection area to see which equipments are for the old versions and which ones are for the new versions. This inbuilt view is what I like in IBM Rational DOORS. So, for a database and a set of requirements, it will select and show unique attributes for a release or a generation."

"I really like the customization that can be done using the DOORS Extension Language (DXL)."

"The program is very stable."

"The traceability matrix in DOORS improved our project outcomes. It helps ensure coverage of requirements at different levels, from user requirements to software requirements to test requirements."

"The most valuable feature is the management verification and login."

"3SL Cradle could be improved with better support for SysML functionalities."

"IBM should integrate some solutions they already own toenhance the utility of the product further. Specifically import and export to Office products is more difficult than it needs to be."

"It would have been ok ten years ago, but we are used to having better tools now."

"The interface needs an area to be able to type your query and actually be able to find them."

"Complexity, performance, openness are the three areas that can be improved. The IBM architecture and specifically Jazz looks more complex. There are a lot of servers. It's quite complicated. The search capabilities lack in IBM Rational DOORS Classic for customers who have a database with a requirement of more than 25,000 records. For example, you can search easily for a module, but it's really difficult to look for keywords through the whole database because all the modules are separated into small components, which makes the search quite complex. This is something that's really annoying because when we want to make an impact analysis, we would like to analyze the product globally. It's quite difficult to manage. The fact that you can interact externally with data makes it complex. The approach is complex and doesn't work as expected. For example, when I tried to experiment with exporting some records, the tool crashed, but I couldn't find out the root cause, that is, whether it happened because of Rational Windows or lack of memory. It was just crashing. Logs weren't very clear. IBM can try to use more recent technology for different aspects and make it easy. They can also provide free integration from DOORS Classic to DOORS. Currently, all the customization in Excel is lost, which makes it very complex. It would be a feature to make new versions compatible with features in the past versions."

"Overall, the user experience should be enhanced."

"I think there is probably room to improve by offering free training."

"Both the performance and the price could be improved."

"Enhancing security measures, particularly when handling multiple projects simultaneously, would be beneficial to prevent data loss within DOORS."

"Pricing can vary depending on the size of the organization and how contracts are negotiated."

"I would rate the pricing a seven out of ten, with one being very affordable and ten being quite expensive."

"It's expensive."

"I don't personally know what the numbers are. I just know that one of the reasons we've limited it to three seats is a function of cost."

"IBM Rational DOORS is highly expensive."

"IBM DOORS is available at a reasonable price"

"The licensing cost is too high."

"The licensing costs for the product are quite high."