"ALM Quality Center is a reliable, consolidated product."
"It's easy to create defects and easy to sync them up with a developer. Immediately, once created, it will trigger an email to the developer and we'll start a conversation with the developer regarding the requirements that have not been matched."
"Defect management is very good."
"With test execution, you have an option to create custom fields. It is also really user-friendly. With other tools, we only have restricted fields and we cannot customize or add new columns or fields that users can make use of while testing. ALM is very flexible for creating new fields. It is easy for users to understand the application."
"Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is quite stable."
"What they do best is test management. That's their strong point."
"You can maintain your test cases and requirements. You can also log the defects in it and make the traceability metrics out of it. There are all sorts of things you can do in this. It is not that complex to use. In terms of user experience, it is very simple to adopt. It is a good product."
"It has a brand new look and feel. It comes with a new dashboard that looks nice, and you can see exactly what you have been working with."
"The user interface is fine."
"One of the most valuable features of this solution is recording and replaying, and the fact that there are multiple options available to do this."
"The most valuable part of the product is the way you can scale the basic testing easily."
"Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise Is very user-friendly."
"I think the number one feature everybody likes is the capability to easily generate virtual users as well as the reporting."
"We have a centralized delivery team and we are able to meet enterprise requirements, which include different types of protocols that are involved, including scripting. The technology supports that and enables us to have a wider range of testing. Enterprise-level testing is something that we are satisfied with."
"Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise supports a lot of technologies. The existing performance testing that this tool is capable of is good. The protocols that are available are widely varied when compared to other performance testing tools."
"The product is good, and the concept is good as well."
"We cannot rearrange the Grid in the Test Lab. It is in alphabetical order right now. But sometimes a user will want to see, for example, the X column next to the B column. If they came out with that it would be useful for us. They are working on that, as we have raised that request with Micro Focus."
"When it came to JIRA and Agile adoption, that was not really easy to do with ALM. I tried, but I was not able to do much on that... There is room for improvement in the way it connects to and handles Agile projects."
"We are looking for more automation capabilities."
"It is pricey."
"If the solution could create a lighter, more flexible tool with more adaptability to new methodologies such as agile, it would be great."
"It can be quite clunky, and it can easily be configured badly, which I've seen in a couple of places. If it is configured badly, it can be very hard to use. It is not so easy to integrate with other products. I've not used Micro Focus in a proper CI/CD pipeline, and I haven't managed to get that working because that has not been my focus. So, I find it hard. I've often lost the information because it had committed badly. It doesn't commit very well sometimes, but that might have to do with the sites that I was working at and the way they had configured it."
"Browser support needs improvement. Currently, it can only run on IE, Internet Explorer. It doesn't work on Firefox, doesn't work on Chrome, doesn't work on a Mac book. Those are the new technologies where most companies move towards. That's been outstanding for quite a while before it even became Micro Focus tools when it was still HP. Even before HP, that's always been an issue."
"One drawback is that ALM only launches with the IE browser. It is not supporting the latest in Chrome... It should be launched for all of the latest browsers."
"Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise needs to add more features for Citrix performance-based applications testing. This was one of the challenges we observed. Additionally, we experienced some APIs challenges."
"Third-party product integrations could be a little more slickly handled."
"It's not that popular on the cloud."
"It would be good if we could look forward at the future technology needs we have. I would like to see Micro Focus provide more customer awareness around how LoadRunner can fulfill requirements with Big Data use cases, for example, where you do performance testing at the scale of data lakes... when it comes to technologies our company has yet to adopt, I would like to see an indication from Micro Focus of how one does performance testing and what kinds of challenges can we foresee. Those kinds of studies would really help us."
"The reporting has room for improvement."
"I believe the data that demonstrates the automated correlations should be corrected."
"The installation has not been straightforward, and we have had so many problems. We have had to re-install, try to install on a different machine, etc. We have not been able to launch the LRE server itself yet."
"Micro Focus needs to improve in terms of support. With the same support plan but when the product was owned by HP, support was more responsive and better coordinated."
More Micro Focus ALM Quality Center Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise Pricing and Cost Advice →
Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is ranked 5th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 31 reviews while Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is ranked 6th in Performance Testing Tools with 8 reviews. Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is rated 7.2, while Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is rated 7.0. The top reviewer of Micro Focus ALM Quality Center writes "Makes it easy to go back and execute the same test every time with automation". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise writes "Full geographical coverage, integrates well with monitoring tools, granular project inspection capabilities". Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is most compared with Micro Focus ALM Octane, Microsoft Azure DevOps, Jira, Tricentis qTest and TestRail by Gurock, whereas Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is most compared with Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional, Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud, Micro Focus Silk Performer, Apache JMeter and BlazeMeter.
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.
