We performed a comparison between AgileCraft and OpenText ALM / Quality Center based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Atlassian, Nutanix and others in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites."The linking of PI Objectives with different features was one of the cool things. It had features, epics, and stories out of the box."
"It's basically the way to show the work that we do as QA testers, and to have a historical view of those executions."
"The most valuable user feature that we use right now is the camera."
"I like the traceability, especially between requirements, testing, and defects."
"The most valuable feature of Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is its support for many automation technologies."
"I found the ease of use most valuable in Micro Focus ALM Quality Center. Creating test cases is easier because the solution allows writing in Excel."
"Integration with other HPE products."
"Test Execution (Test Lab): This allows us to track our manual tests with date and time and enter actual results and screenshots."
"It allows us to easily make linkage and dependencies, with plenty of integrations."
"It should just have the integration with Jira. We haven't looked at it since Atlassian bought the product."
"Micro Focus is an expensive tool."
"The product is good, it's great, but when compared to other products with the latest methodologies, or when rating it as a software development tool, then I'll have to rate it with a lower score because there's a lot of other great tools where you can interconnect them, use them, scale them, and leverage. It all depends on the cost."
"There were multiple modules and stuff to the solution so maybe the requirements can map to test scripts. It can't map to test steps. If you've got a process that's set up and you've got multiple test scripts that are in it, each script has to be linked to the requirement and the whole set can't be. If we're doing process-driven testing, it's more difficult to do it at the script level, which is what we're finding from a traceability perspective."
"There are always new features and more support for new and legacy technology architectures with each release. But the bad news is a growing list of long-standing issues with the product rarely gets addressed."
"There's room for improvement on the reporting side of things and the scheduling, in general, is a bit clunky."
"Quality Center's UI is outdated, and it's a little bit slow on the login part and different parts of the application. That's why we're switching solutions. I believe most companies are switching to Octane or something else. Micro Focus should enhance the interface and reports."
"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."
"If they could improve their BPT business components that would be good"
More OpenText ALM / Quality Center Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
AgileCraft is ranked 18th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites while OpenText ALM / Quality Center is ranked 6th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 197 reviews. AgileCraft is rated 7.0, while OpenText ALM / Quality Center is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of AgileCraft writes "Linking of PI Objectives with different features was cool, but it didn't have integration with Jira". 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 ". AgileCraft is most compared with Jira, Jira Align, Rally Software and Broadcom Clarity , 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 Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites vendors.
We monitor all Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites 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.
