"It is a tool, and it works. It has got good linkage and good traceability between the test cases and the defects. It has got lots of features for testing."
"What they do best is test management. That's their strong point."
"Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is quite stable."
"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."
"I love to use this solution with single projects. It has helped our productivity. With the metrics that I receive, I can put them onto the management model so I can see them there. It has reduced our time for project management and controls by 20 percent."
"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."
"I like that it integrates with the Jira solutions."
"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."
"It's easy to use for beginners and non-technical people."
"The scalability of Micro Focus UFT One is good."
"I find UFT One to be very good for thick clients, which are non-browser applications."
"It is easy to automate and new personnel can start learning automation using UFT One. You don't have to learn any scripting."
"Has improved our organization by allowing us to obtain fast, detailed information about the behavior of our products and to supply this to the customer, enabling us to work together without the need for special programming knowledge."
"For traditional automation, approximately half of our tests end up automated. Therefore, we are saving half the testing time by pushing it off to automation. That gives it an intrinsic benefit of more time for manual testers and business testers to work on possibly more important and interesting things. For some of our applications, they don't just have to do happy path testing anymore, they can go more in-depth and breadth into the process."
"The production and the efficiency of making your test cases can be very high."
"On a scale of one to ten, I would give Micro Focus UFT One a 10 because it is a reliable product, it works, it's as good or better than similar solutions especially because you get technical support from real people. Additionally, upgrades are always provided on a consistent basis."
"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."
"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."
"It is not a scalable solution."
"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."
"There were multiple modules and stuff to the solution so maybe the requirements can map to test scripts. It can't map to test steps. If you've got a process that's set up and you've got multiple test scripts that are in it, each script has to be linked to the requirement and the whole set can't be. If we're doing process-driven testing, it's more difficult to do it at the script level, which is what we're finding from a traceability perspective."
"If the solution could create a lighter, more flexible tool with more adaptability to new methodologies such as agile, it would be great."
"Currently, what's missing in the solution is the ability for users to see the ongoing scenarios and the status of those scenarios versus the requirements. As for the management tools, they also need to be improved so users can have a better idea of what's going on in just one look, so they can manage testing activities better."
"Sometimes I do run my queries from the admin login. However, if I want to reassess all my test cases, then I am still doing this in a manual manner. I write SQL queries, then fire them off. Therefore, a library of those SQL queries would help. If we could have a typical SQL query to change the parameters within test cases, then this is one aspect I can still think that could be included in ALM. Though they would need to be analyzed and used in a very knowledgeable way."
"The overall design needs an entire overhaul. We prefer software designed to ensure the package isn't too loaded."
"I'd like to see test case-related reports included in the solution."
"We used to run it as a test suite. Micro Focus provides that in terms of a test management tool as ALM, but when we think of integrating with a distributed version control system, like Jenkins, there isn't much integration available. That means we need to make use of external solutions to make it work."
"UFT has a recording feature. They could make the recording feature window bigger for whatever activities that I am recording. It would improve the user experience if they could create a separate floating panel (or have it automatically show on the side) once the recording starts."
"Sometimes, the results' file size can be intense. I wish it was a little more compact."
"We have had some issues with stability, where it crashes sometimes."
"[Tech support is] not a 10 because what happens with some of our issues is that we might not get a patch quickly and we have to hold on to an application until we get a proper solution."
"The scripting language could be improved. They're currently using Visual Basic, but I think that people need something more advanced, like Python or Java."
More Micro Focus ALM Quality Center Pricing and Cost Advice →
Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is ranked 6th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 31 reviews while Micro Focus UFT One is ranked 2nd in Functional Testing Tools with 18 reviews. Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is rated 7.0, while Micro Focus UFT One is rated 7.6. 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 UFT One writes "Testers have been able to free up their time: instead of doing mundane, repetitive tasks, they shift them off to automation". Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is most compared with Micro Focus ALM Octane, Microsoft Azure DevOps, Jira, Tricentis qTest and Zephyr Enterprise, whereas Micro Focus UFT One is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Micro Focus UFT Developer, Selenium HQ, SmartBear TestComplete and Silk Test.
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.
