OpenText ALM / Quality Center vs OpenText Silk Test comparison

"The test-case repository and linkage through to regression requirements will absolutely be a key component for us. We haven't got it yet, but when we've got an enterprise regression suite, that will be a key deliverable for them. We will be able to have all of the regression suite in one place, linked to the right requirements."

"I like that it integrates with the Jira solutions."

"It's basically the way to show the work that we do as QA testers, and to have a historical view of those executions."

"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."

"The stability is very good."

"The integration with UFT is nice."

"This solution is open and very easy to integrate. The interface is good too."

"Ability to customize modules, particularly Defect Tracking module on company specific needs"

"The ability to develop scripts in Visual Studio, Visual Studio integration, is the most valuable feature."

"The scalability of the solution is quite good. You can easily expand the product if you need to."

"The major thing it has helped with is to reduce the workload on testing activities."

"Scripting is the most valuable. We are able to record and then go in and modify the script that it creates. It has a lot of generative scripts."

"A good automation tool that supports SAP functional testing."

"The feature I like most is the ease of reporting."

"It's easy to automate and accelerate testing."

"The statistics that are available are very good."

"HP-QC does not support Agile. It is designed for Waterfall. This is the number one issue that we're facing right now, which is why we want to look for another tool. We're a pharmaceutical services company, so we require electronic signatures in a tool, but this functionality isn't available in HP-QC. We don't have 21 CFR, Part 11, electronic signatures, and we need compliant electronic signatures. Some of the ALM tools can toggle between tabular format and document format for requirements, but the same feature is not available in this solution. There is also no concept of base-lining or versioning. It doesn't exist."

"It is not a scalable solution."

"There is room for improvement in the scalability and stability of the solution."

"As soon as it's available on-premises we want to move to ALM Octane as it's mainly web based, has the capability to work with major tests, and integrates with Jenkins for continuous integration."

"The integration could be improved because with Agile technology you are working more quickly than with a top-down methodology."

"The UFT tests don't work very well and it seems to depend on things as simple as the screen resolution on a machine that I've moved to."

"There's room for improvement in the requirements traceability with Micro Focus ALM Quality Center. That could use an uplift."

"Micro Focus ALM Quality Center should improve the reports. Reporting on tax execution progress against the plan. However, they might have improved over two years since I have used the solution."

"The pricing could be improved."

"The solution has a lack of compatibility with newer technologies."

"The pricing is an issue, the program is very expensive. That is something that can improve."

"They should extend some of the functions that are a bit clunky and improve the integration."

"Everything is very manual. It's up to us to find out exactly what the issues are."

"Could be more user-friendly on the installation and configuration side."

"The support for automation with iOS applications can be better."

"We moved to Ranorex because the solution did not easily scale, and we could not find good and short term third-party help. We needed to have a bigger pool of third-party contractors that we could draw on for specific implementations. Silk didn't have that, and we found what we needed for Ranorex here in the Houston area. It would be good if there is more community support. I don't know if Silk runs a user conference once a year and how they set up partners. We need to be able to talk to somebody more than just on the phone. It really comes right down to that. The generated automated script was highly dependent upon screen position and other keys that were not as robust as we wanted. We found the automated script generated by Ranorex and the other key information about a specific data point to be more robust. It handled the transition better when we moved from computer to computer and from one size of the application to the other size. When we restarted Silk, we typically had to recalibrate screen elements within the script. Ranorex also has some of these same issues, but when we restart, it typically is faster, which is important."

"The pricing is expensive nowadays."

"It is an expensive tool. I think one needs to pay 10,000 USD towards the perpetual licensing model."

"Most vendors offer the same pricing, though some vendors offer a cheaper price for their cloud/SaaS solution versus their on-premise. However, cloud/SaaS solutions result in a loss of freedom. E.g., if you want to make a change, most of the time it needs to be validated by the vendor, then you're being charged an addition fee. Sometimes, even if you are rejected, you are charged because it's a risk to the entire environment."

"HPE has one of the most rigid, inflexible, and super expensive license models."

"I don't know the exact numbers, but I know it is pricey. When we talked to the sales reps we work with from our company, they say, "Well, Micro Focus will never lose on price." So, they are willing to do a lot of negotiating if it is required."

"ALM Quality Center is a little bit costly."

"Sure, HP UFT is not free. But consider what you get for that cost: A stable product that is easy to use; the kitchen sink of technology stack support; decades of code (which in many cases actually is free); a version that is a stepping stone to an easier Selenium design; and a support base that is more that just the kindness of strangers."

"Pricing could be improved as it's high-priced. I don't exactly know the pricing point, but previously, I know that it was really high so less people were able to use it for their projects."

"Our licensing fees are on a yearly basis, and while I think that the price is quite reasonable I am not allowed to share those details."

"We paid annually. There is a purchase cost, and then there is an ongoing maintenance fee."