Agile Manager [EOL] vs Rally Software comparison

"How you write your user stories, and the requirements gathering, in Agile Manager is pretty good."

"It's good only for documenting manual test cases."

"The most valuable feature is actually creating a field within there for architectural review. So when teams are struggling or have questions on the architecture or strategy that they take, they can actually flag that particular story, release, or project. Those can then be reviewed by the architecture team and the teams actually get additional information on how to course-correct, build on the architecture that we're trying to build throughout the organization, and get over road blocks much quicker."

"Reporting is much easier and faster than Micro Focus ALM, with CA AC built on web services... Also, the data is more granular when it comes to tasks, iterations, sprints, and releases."

"The effect of these kind of tools drives the way you organize things. It helps you shape the way you flow."

"I was able to create epics for our budgeting concerns and it helped me link everything together."

"With this product, searching for historical information or the evolution of the requirement, detecting conflict between projects has helped a lot."

"It's designed around Agile, so it has all of the pieces that match up with the process."

"Ease of use - I don't even know when a new release is coming and I don't need to because it's so easy to use what's new."

"The testing module that we are used to, that wasn't there at all."

"As it is right now, it does not support automation of the quality assurance process. It just supports manual testing."

"Rally Software is highly complex, and it takes some effort to get everything tied together. But once you do, it's a satisfying experience, and the result looks beautiful. Azure, ServiceNow, and Jira do not have all the features that Rally Software provides in one place, making it an exceptional tool for project management."

"I think there is a missing link with the development activity. Some developers are pushing in new versions of the code, but you cannot make the link from the user story to a specific application version."

"It is hard to track the changes. For example, we're in sprint 25, and then we have 26, 27, 28, and 29. Throughout that whole time, we're developing pipelines in Azure, moving to GitHub, creating pipelines, and working with teams. But sometimes, we need to revisit specific decisions made in previous sprints, like pipeline details. Maybe it's in our Azure Wiki, GitHub, or Teams, but it's not always consistent. I wish I could search for all tasks or stories related to that particular effort without needing to know everyone's individual stories or features."

"Customization features may not be exposed or unavailable, so people may be looking for them. So, customization is an area people have told me is more desirable."

"It could improve by being self-organizing: user stories, different hierarchies, and different perspectives. Not just as a single hierarchical structure, but something that can be multidimensional."

"What I don't like about it is that it is really hard to find old work to reference information and use the reporting section of the application in terms of trying to analyze trends. If I am trying to find out which interfaces took this long and I want to compare and measure improvement from one quarter to another quarter, the reporting mechanism within Rally is very troublesome. They have an Excel plugin that you're supposed to use, but you literally have to pull the raw data out before you can do the analysis. You can't do it within Rally, and if you can, it is a secret, and I don't know how to do it. It should have better, easier, and user-friendly reporting without having to use the Excel add-in. It is very clunky. There is a lot of data in there, but it is not organized in such a way that makes it intuitive. You really have to kind of look for where do you put your documentation or dates. Some customization is available, but it is not plug-and-play like Jira. When I switched from TFS to Jira, I just went and started using Jira, whereas with Rally, you kind of have to really get in and figure out what you need to do before you set stuff up, or you're going to get yourself stuck. You can just start using Jira and be successful."

"It requires better scalability for the implementation of the whole suite. We do not use it in that fashion, and visibility is sometimes a problem."

"From a price point, it's a cost effective solution for our needs."

"We are always looking for a discount, if the solution was less expensive it would be a benefit."

"I understand it's a little more expensive. That is why many people prefer Jira."

"It is expensive and may not be worthwhile for a small company."

"Rally Software costs $50 a month, and for a base account, that price is acceptable."

"The license costs are fairly high as compared to some of the other solutions out there."

"I don't know the exact pricing, but I think the tool is priced high. They provide quality workmanship, good software, regular upgrades, and they're always attentive and listen to users. Everything comes with a price. I think it's an expensive solution compared to Jira or other competitors, but it's a complete package."

"Frankly, pricing is expensive and needs to be carefully planned for when budgeting."