We performed a comparison between 3SL Cradle and IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM, Atlassian, Siemens and others in Application Requirements Management."3SL Cradle's most valuable feature is its flexibility in managing all your needs immediately."
"It's web-based, so you don't have anything to install."
"IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation is easier to expand to build a backend with several servers, so you can also use it to scale up to several hundreds of users without major problems."
"There are many good features with DOORS. The solution has a concept of streams and baselines, as well as a concept of components. A component is a subproject inside a project."
"The tool's most valuable feature is displaying requirements in a tabular format. This means you can see everything laid out in columns and rows. It is more aesthetic compared to other tools. The traceability matrix helps to view things better. It comes with different linking rules."
"The most valuable features are the versioning of requirements and the possibility to reuse them."
"One of the most valuable features is how you can tailor the modules."
"The most valuable features are the baselines and links."
"As far as maintaining our requirements so that we can have copies of them, it's good. I can print it out if necessary."
"3SL Cradle could be improved with better support for SysML functionalities."
"Be very careful how you load your DNG server. There are limits to the number of artifacts a server can handle."
"It does have a tendency to condense the requirements. It kind of puts them in a tree format. Sometimes those trees are a little difficult."
"As a web tool, DNG can be difficult to use if the server is loaded or your network connection to it is saturated."
"IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation has room for improvement compared to other tools like Polaris and Jama Connect. These tools offer more flexibility and options for developers, which IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation lacks. For example, you can define your link rules in Jama Connect, but you can't do that in IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation."
"It offers a bad user experience and the usability is poor."
"When you are not working on it every day it is not very intuitive."
"The only additional feature would be if it had dynamic linking to other MBSE tool sets or industry-leading tools."
"I have come to the conclusion that if you are considering migrating from DOORS to DNG, don't! Instead of spending 100's to 1000's of hours doing migrations, invest those hours in a DXL programmer to make DOORS do what it isn't doing for you now."
More IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation Pricing and Cost Advice →
3SL Cradle is ranked 11th in Application Requirements Management with 2 reviews while IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation is ranked 4th in Application Requirements Management with 12 reviews. 3SL Cradle is rated 9.0, while IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of 3SL Cradle writes "Flexible solution that manages all your needs". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation writes "An industry-leading tool to demonstrate traceability between requirements, with valuable features for tailoring modules and managing several thousand requirements". 3SL Cradle is most compared with IBM Rational DOORS and Jira, whereas IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation is most compared with IBM Rational DOORS, Jama Connect, Jira, Polarion Requirements and Helix ALM.
See our list of best Application Requirements Management vendors.
We monitor all Application Requirements Management 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.