We performed a comparison between Adaptavist Test Management for Jira and OpenText ALM / Quality Center based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText, Microsoft, IDERA and others in Test Management Tools."It is a scalable solution."
"The program is very stable and scalable."
"We don't use technical support. We have an office in Austria that provides us with solutions. Also, this solution is pretty simple and user-friendly. We don't really need help with it."
"You can group test cases together and track the execution of them."
"The initial setup is straightforward. It's not too hard to deploy."
"The most valuable feature of Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is the alignment of the test to the execution and the linking of the defects to the two. It automatically links any issues you have to the test."
"I like the traceability, especially between requirements, testing, and defects."
"The AI and functionality interface are useful."
"Quality management, project management from a QA perspective - testing, defect management, how testing relates back to requirements."
"I love linking/associating the requirements to a test case. That's where I get to know my requirement coverage, which helps a lot at a practical level. So, we use the traceability and visibility features a lot. This helps us to understand if there are any requirements not linked to any test case, thus not getting tested at all. That missing link is always very visible, which helps us to create our requirement traceability matrix and maintain it in a dynamic way. Even with changing requirements, we can keep on changing or updating the tool."
"This solution is open and very easy to integrate. The interface is good too."
"The product can scale."
"I don't like that you need to use a lot of tabs. One test case takes 15-20 minutes and on Zephyr is take about 5-10 minutes."
"They should work on integrating the solution with AI."
"Lacking visual gadgets that go on a dashboard, pie charts, bar charts and histograms."
"Quality Center's ability to connect all the different projects to reflect status and progress is quite complicated. We may develop something because there are so many projects. Right now, I have to do something which Quality Center is really not designed for: over reporting. This is a very big problem right now. We may develop some controls, but it is problem at the moment. I love Quality Center for individual projects to work with it. However, if you have a lot of projects for Quality Manager to do cross reporting on many projects, then it's almost impossible. It takes a lot of time."
"If they could improve their BPT business components that would be good"
"HPE ALM’s out-of-the-box reporting can be perceived as rigid and limited, to an extent."
"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."
"Sometimes I do run my queries from the admin login. However, if I want to reassess all my test cases, then I am still doing this in a manual manner. I write SQL queries, then fire them off. Therefore, a library of those SQL queries would help. If we could have a typical SQL query to change the parameters within test cases, then this is one aspect I can still think that could be included in ALM. Though they would need to be analyzed and used in a very knowledgeable way."
"Certain features are lousy. Those features can drag the whole server down. There are times that the complex SQL queries are not easy to do within this solution."
"Is not very user-friendly."
"We are looking for more automation capabilities."
More Adaptavist Test Management for Jira Pricing and Cost Advice →
More OpenText ALM / Quality Center Pricing and Cost Advice →
Adaptavist Test Management for Jira is ranked 12th in Test Management Tools with 4 reviews while OpenText ALM / Quality Center is ranked 1st in Test Management Tools with 197 reviews. Adaptavist Test Management for Jira is rated 7.2, while OpenText ALM / Quality Center is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Adaptavist Test Management for Jira writes "Integrates with any automation tool, but the granular reporting feature should be more intuitive ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText ALM / Quality Center writes "Offers features for higher-end traceability and integration with different tools but lacks in scalability ". Adaptavist Test Management for Jira is most compared with Zephyr Enterprise, Tricentis Tosca and Tricentis qTest, whereas OpenText ALM / Quality Center is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, OpenText ALM Octane, Jira, Tricentis qTest and Zephyr Enterprise.
See our list of best Test Management Tools vendors.
We monitor all Test Management Tools 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.