Codebeamer and OpenText Software Delivery Management are prominent competitors in the field of software delivery management. OpenText is perceived as superior due to its comprehensive features, particularly in agile methodologies and pipeline integrations.
Features: Codebeamer offers full traceability, high customization ease, and robust collaboration supported by industry-specific modules and templates. It simplifies migration processes and integrates well with various standards. OpenText Software Delivery Management provides a comprehensive agile environment with extensive built-in integrations, strong pipeline functionality, and advanced defect management capabilities.
Room for Improvement: Codebeamer users desire improvements in ease of use, broader API support, and better integration with DevOps solutions. Enhancing customization depth and backward compatibility would also be beneficial. OpenText Software Delivery Management requires enhancements in reporting flexibility, UI customization, and integration breadth, especially in agile-to-waterfall transitions.
Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Codebeamer supports versatile deployment models such as on-premises and cloud options, with high satisfaction in technical support due to prompt query resolution. OpenText Software Delivery Management offers similar deployment flexibility, though real-time assistance and localization improvements could enhance user experience.
Pricing and ROI: Codebeamer is moderately priced, providing significant ROI through reduced costs and efficient customization, with substantial time savings. Its ready-made modules justify its pricing for specific sectors. OpenText Software Delivery Management is considered expensive; however, its comprehensive features improve operational efficiencies, accommodating enterprises of all sizes within its pricing strategy.
ROI can manifest through cost savings and increased development speed.
The solution has produced a return on investment.
Codebeamer saves time and money for certain use cases, such as AUTOSPICE implementations.
The ability to generate audit evidence with a single click saves ten days of work for ten people, enabling them to focus on other tasks.
If I raise an issue as high priority, I receive responses in six to eight hours.
For out-of-the-box support, the customer service from PTC is satisfactory.
In a project, I have experienced up to 180 licenses running during peak times and as low as ten licenses during downtime without facing upgrade or downgrade issues.
On a scale from one to ten, I would rate the scalability of Codebeamer as eight or nine because it is a highly scalable solution.
We can expand the number of servers and resources as required.
From a scale of one to ten, I would rate the stability of Codebeamer as eight to nine because the solution is highly stable.
Running it independently or with a bigger server generally doesn't cause any issues.
There were stability issues due to version compatibility.
Beyond standards management for specific industries, Codebeamer should develop standards for areas where software code management and hardware-software integration are needed.
Older versions of PDM Windchill face compatibility issues with newer versions of Codebeamer, requiring users to downgrade Codebeamer to establish integration.
If terminology changes, modifications must be done manually or by exporting the document to Word or Excel, which is time-consuming.
While it aims to be as flexible as possible for a large enterprise application, sometimes there are limitations that may not meet specific organizational needs.
Codebeamer is fairly priced against competition.
Codebeamer is on the expensive side, but it provides ready-made modules for standards like ASPICE and ISO 26262, which might justify the cost for customers looking for those solutions.
OpenText ALM Octane is an expensive product.
Its integration capability is very high, with almost eighty to eighty-five percent of integrations available readily out of the box, minimizing the need for specific integration-related work.
Codebeamer saves on time and resources with its web-based client, eliminating the need to install it on every system.
The requirements management aspect of Codebeamer is critical because it helps various industries, such as automotive or medical devices, to capture requirements based on industry-specific standards and processes.
Its ability to generate audit evidence with a single click is a significant advantage, as it saves considerable time and money compared to manual processes.
codeBeamer ALM is a market-leading Application Lifecycle Management platform. It is holistically integrated, and is packed with features that help you develop better products faster. Scale, monitor, control, and report on your entire development lifecycle conveniently, and comply with safety-critical regulations. Cut development time and costs.
OpenText Software Delivery Management provides application lifecycle management with Agile and Waterfall support. It features intuitive interfaces, CI/CD integration, automated testing, and robust reporting, improving project management efficiency and usability.
Designed to enhance teams' productivity and streamline processes, OpenText Software Delivery Management integrates seamlessly with Agile methodologies. Its comprehensive backlog and requirements management, user stories, and test management make it a complete tool for managing the development lifecycle. The platform aligns with DevOps, providing traceability and extensive customization options. Traceability from requirements to deployments is enhanced, making it easier for teams to track progress. It offers integration with popular tools like Jenkins and JIRA, ensuring a unified approach to continuous delivery and testing management.
What key features does OpenText Software Delivery Management include?OpenText Software Delivery Management is implemented across technology-focused industries, supporting Agile processes like requirements management and defect tracking. Organizations use it to standardize development workflows and optimize continuous delivery integration, choosing it for its ability to support both Agile and Waterfall methodologies within application lifecycle management.
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.
