We performed a comparison between IBM Rational ALM, OpenText ALM / Quality Center, and TFS 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.
"It is relatively easy to use and user-friendly once the setup is complete."
"One of the key advantages of IBM Rational ALM is its workflow capabilities, which enable seamless collaboration between development and production teams and ensure that all stakeholders are aware of the progress and readiness of the solution. Additionally, the solution is good for integration."
"The most valuable feature is the reporting of the CPU usage on the dashboard."
"We have something called the GC (global configuration), which is a unique feature compared to any other competitor we have in the ALM space."
"IBM Rational ALM is a very good tool. I like the management and traceability features and the test management tool. The latter is not linked with the stories and fixed management. It is really useful, and we can create test plans. We can also test some metrics related to QA."
"The integration with Git works well."
"The planning feature is rich with Scrum concepts: Sprint, Sprint retrospective, the rules in the Scrum framework."
"Everyone in a team can work on the same platform and share the same information."
"So the first impression that hits me about HP UFT 14.0 (formerly QTP) is that it seems to be a whole lot faster! But that could be subjective, as I'm running it on a high end gaming system."
"The tools could be useful if we were utilizing them more effectively"
"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."
"Within Quality Center, you have the dashboard where you can monitor your progress over different entities. You can build your own SQL query segments, and all that data is there in the system, then you can make a dashboard report."
"Lab Management is a valuable feature, because you have a 360 view."
"The enhanced dashboards capabilities are useful for senior management to view the progress of releases under the portfolio in one go and also drill down to the graphs."
"ALM Quality Center's best features are the test lab, requirement tab, and report dashboard."
"I personally found the defect tracking feature very useful in my ongoing project."
"TFS is very user-friendly."
"I have found almost all of the features valuable because it integrates well with your Microsoft products. If a client is using the entire Microsoft platform, then TFS would be definitely preferable. It integrates with the digital studio development environment as well."
"Microsoft's technical team is supportive."
"Good branching and labelling features."
"Version Control: TFS offers both the centralized “TFVC” version control technology as well as the distributed “Git” version control technology."
"The most valuable feature of TFS is its compatibility with Microsoft Windows systems. We have predominantly Microsoft solutions and TFS work well."
"I like its MTM (Microsoft Test Manager) section which gives us options to create various test plans and add test cases into it."
"Some of the valuable features are version control and the ability to create different collections in terms of segregating the authorization for teams who connect to small projects."
"The directory designer manager is uncivil. The design manager is clearly really unstable."
"The solution can improve in the development area and the customized applications."
"The stability of IBM Rational ALM could be improved."
"IBM Rational ALM should remove the features not used by the customers and keep this product as lightweight as possible."
"The stability of this solution can be improved."
"The features should be more intuitive. If I'm looking for something, its location should be easy to locate."
"One of the complaints from users is that they have to click buttons too many times for just a simple task. Changing this would lead to a better user experience."
"The reporting functionality needs to be improved."
"The solution needs to offer support for Agile. Currently, ALM only supports Waterfall."
"If the solution could create a lighter, more flexible tool with more adaptability to new methodologies such as agile, it would be great."
"Cross project reporting is limited to similar database schemas"
"ALM Quality Center could be improved with more techniques to manage Agile processes."
"ALM uses a waterfall approach. We have some hybrid approaches in the company and need a more agile approach."
"The uploading of test scripts can get a little cumbersome and that is a very sensitive task. They could improve on that a lot. It's really important that this gets better as I'm loading close to a thousand test scripts per cycle."
"It's not intuitive in that way, which has always been a problem, especially with business users."
"If they could improve their BPT business components that would be good"
"Since it is Microsoft, it is technology agnostic, thus it does not really fit into various different technologies in the organization."
"The user interface could improve and test management was not useful in TFS."
"The execution of test cases could stand improvement."
"Not all of the functionality, which is exposed by the command line interface (tf.exe) is available in the Visual Studio GUI."
"Overall, I think it would be useful to have something similar where Microsoft comes up with supporting concepts of scaling Agile in TFS so that clients don't have to look for a separate tool."
"TFS and MTM have their own style of working and they are different from other tools like Jira or TestRail, which are simpler and easy to use."
"The dashboard needs more enhancements."
"Access and permissions are confusing when attempting to include basic manual testing functionalities."
More OpenText ALM / Quality Center Pricing and Cost Advice →
