We performed a comparison between IBM Rational Performance Tester, OpenText ALM / Quality Center, and TFS based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText, IDERA, Microsoft and others in Test Management Tools."It can support both web applications and mobile applications, and in certain cases, it can also support testing of desktop applications or software-based applications. You can write web applications, mobile applications, and software-based applications."
"Technical support is very good. I'm very satisfied with the assistance we've received so far."
"Defect management is very good."
"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."
"ALM Quality Center's best features are the test lab, requirement tab, and report dashboard."
"Quality management, project management from a QA perspective - testing, defect management, how testing relates back to requirements."
"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."
"We can get an entire project into a single repository where we can view all the data in detail. This is where we keep all our test cases where everyone can reference them. This provides everyone access to the test cases and artifacts via the cloud. There is no need to contact anyone."
"I personally found the defect tracking feature very useful in my ongoing project."
"Ability to customize modules, particularly Defect Tracking module on company specific needs"
"I like the Kanban board. It is very useful in terms of seeing who is working on what and what the current status of work is."
"The most valuable features are the dashboard and task-selection capability."
"The solution is very much stable."
"From the project management perspective, the tool is efficiently managing teams by giving management information, such as reports, graphs, velocity, capacity, etc."
"The traceability is valuable. While managing the workflows, it was always nice to have that traceability from requirements and all the way through design. It integrates with Microsoft Test Manager, and you can have everything that is related to a requirement attached to it."
"The most valuable features are test case writing and bug tracking."
"The most valuable feature is the backlog."
"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."
"There are some features that Micro Focus LoadRunner provides, but they are not available in IBM Rational Performance Tester. They should include such features. It can also have more reports similar to what HP provides. It might also need some improvement in terms of the tools and support for other technology areas. Certain technologies are not supported by every tool. They need to support all sorts of technologies and platforms on which web applications and mobile applications are built. They need complete support for all sorts of technologies."
"The solution is not easily scalable. If you want to extend the solution, you need to purchase a different kind of license. You also have to work with the IBM team to assist in scaling."
"Only Internet Explorer is supported. That is a big problem. They don't support Chrome and Firefox and so on."
"HPE ALM’s out-of-the-box reporting can be perceived as rigid and limited, to an extent."
"It needs Pure-FTPd WebUI and single sign-on."
"Is not very user-friendly."
"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."
"ALM uses a waterfall approach. We have some hybrid approaches in the company and need a more agile approach."
"The version of Micro Focus ALM that we use only works through Internet Explorer (IE). We have to communicate to everyone that they can only use IE with the solution. This is a big limitation. We should be free to use any type of browser or operating system. We have customers and partners who are unable to log into the system and enter their defects because they work on a different operating system."
"ALM Quality Center could be improved with more techniques to manage Agile processes."
"TFS isn't a great tool if you're on the cloud."
"The manageability and performance of the product are areas of concern where improvements are required."
"The test management interface is not very handy."
"TFS is scalable with different Microsoft tools for test management but it is not scalable with other third-party tools."
"TFS on-premise does not support integration with SharePoint Online."
"Sometimes we feel that it need more CPU, and RAMs on TFS server, either we implemented the hardware with the product minimum requirements."
"The usability of TFS is not that great."
"Its pricing could be improved."
More IBM Rational Performance Tester Pricing and Cost Advice →
More OpenText ALM / Quality Center Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
