We performed a comparison between Micro Focus AccuRev and TFS based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Atlassian, Microsoft, Micro Focus and others in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites."The product has all the features that we for application managementat a lower cost."
"The work item feature is most valuable. It allows us to store all product requirements. We can also link the test cases to those requirements so that we know which feature has already been tested, and which one is waiting for testing. We can also couple the code reviews, unit tests, and automated tests into these requirements. It is reliable. It has all the features and good performance. It also has reporting tools or analysis tools."
"TFS's best features include user-friendly test management, bug reporting, and ID assignment."
"The most valuable features of TFS are the test plans. We can reproduce reusable test plans in test automation. We have a lot of queries and this feature is very useful."
"Team Foundation Server (TFS) is easy to use, and we have a complete trail and traceability. We also like the access control part."
"Basically, the capacity to construct various products is something I find handy."
"The interface is good with TFS."
"User alerts are very helpful for knowing when work is required."
"The most valuable feature is integration, particularly if you have a .NET application."
"It is difficult to gain experience with the product because resources and documentation for learning are not available."
"Currently, we are looking for a solution with which we can incorporate third-party development sites or third-party project teams into the system. Because it is on-premise, it is a bit problematic because we need to have a VPN or something else in the system. A cloud-based solution would be better for us, and that's what we are looking for. Our biggest problem is the external connection, which, of course, is limited by our own IT. It would be good to have some kind of publishing service for this external connection. It might be there, and it might be that our IT is making it impossible for us. Its template editor could be easier to use. Currently, customizing the project templates according to your needs requires some work."
"I would also like a true command prompt like Git."
"TFS isn't a great tool if you're on the cloud."
"It has been really dated. When you start to work more in an agile environment, it is not really that flexible. They tried to replicate the look and feel of Jira, but it is not quite there. It was nice to use in the past, but it is not as flexible now with the changing development environments and methodologies."
"It would be better if we could bring it out on the cloud."
"I understand Microsoft is phasing out TFS in favor of Git, so I would steer anyone interested in TFS to look into Git."
"The solution should have better dashboards."
"The execution of test cases could stand improvement."
Micro Focus AccuRev is ranked 10th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 1 review while TFS is ranked 4th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 20 reviews. Micro Focus AccuRev is rated 10.0, while TFS is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Micro Focus AccuRev writes "Helps us with our compliance goals, native quality management systems and with the legacy systems in our organization". On the other hand, the top reviewer of TFS writes "It is helpful for scheduled releases and enforcing rules, but it should be better at merging changes for multiple developers and retaining the historical information". Micro Focus AccuRev is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps and Jira, whereas TFS is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, Jira, Rally Software, Visual Studio Test Professional and Micro Focus ALM Quality Center.
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.
