OpenText Application Quality Management and Microsoft Azure DevOps compete in the application lifecycle management and DevOps domains. Microsoft Azure DevOps appears to have the upper hand with its robust integration capabilities and user-friendly interface particularly suited for Microsoft environments.
Features: OpenText AQM provides features such as requirements management, test planning, traceability, lifecycle management, and a robust API for custom integrations, making it ideal for large organizations due to scalability. Microsoft Azure DevOps offers integrated tools for CI/CD, project management, and source code management with seamless integration with other Microsoft services, enhancing cloud-based development.
Room for Improvement: OpenText AQM could lower its high licensing costs and improve browser compatibility and user interface ease. The complex reporting features necessitate third-party tools. Microsoft Azure DevOps could enhance report generation and dashboard customization and improve third-party tool integrations for a more intuitive interface.
Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText AQM supports mainly on-premises deployments with private and hybrid cloud options, offering satisfactory technical support with variable responsiveness. Microsoft Azure DevOps offers efficient deployment with its public cloud services and effective customer support through Microsoft's network, although both face occasional tech support process complexities.
Pricing and ROI: OpenText AQM has a high pricing model with licensing fees influenced by deployment scale and configuration, justified by its comprehensive capabilities for large enterprises while exhibiting barriers for smaller organizations. Microsoft Azure DevOps offers flexible, potentially lower-cost licensing especially beneficial for enterprises within the Microsoft ecosystem, enhancing ROI through bundled service integrations and a subscription model accessible for various project sizes.
On a scale of one to ten, where ten is the best, I would say ROI is an eight.
It acts as an enabler for effective test and program management.
Resolving issues took time since understanding our unique problems was not always straightforward for support teams.
I would rate technical support from Microsoft for Microsoft Azure DevOps an eight out of ten.
Technical support has been excellent.
Quality is always high yet not perfect.
I am mostly happy with the technical support from OpenText ALM _ Quality Center.
The scalability has left me pleased, not just for our teams in Europe, the Middle East, and Asia, but as we expanded into North America, Africa, and even Australia.
OpenText ALM Quality Center is definitely scalable.
Its stability might be attributed to its legacy as an on-premise solution that has been in development for more than 25 years.
The solution is stable, and we did not encounter any stability issues.
Everything works ninety-nine percent well.
From a stability standpoint, OpenText ALM Quality Center has been pretty good.
Those processes are a bit difficult for some customers who may not have technical knowledge and don't go through the entire documentation.
Out of the box, the solution is effective, yet with advancements in AI, it has the potential to be more intuitive.
Instead of customers having to try many options themselves, they benefit from practitioner recommendations.
Improvements are needed so that the system can continue running without creating a new run.
The user-friendly nature could be enhanced as the interface isn’t intuitive.
I see a stable tool that remains relevant in the market.
They don't even provide a POC where you can have a sandbox or stuff that you can go through and see how exactly it's costing.
I find it to be expensive.
The price and licensing of Microsoft Azure DevOps were fair.
It would be cheaper to use a cloud model with a pay-per-use licensing model.
I can't approve my own request and move the code around without a review.
Our company organized a training session with a certified Azure expert, which was extremely beneficial for adopting best practices during the initial three months.
No organization would use just one vendor, and the goal is about what works well, is scalable, performs well, and offers a reasonable total cost of ownership.
The integration with internal applications and CollabNet is made possible through exposed APIs, allowing necessary integrations.
It creates constant visibility into the test process, showing the status, bugs, and automated test results.
We can create a requirement for stability metrics with the test cases to ensure all requirements are covered.
Product | Market Share (%) |
---|---|
Microsoft Azure DevOps | 13.0% |
OpenText Application Quality Management | 5.0% |
Other | 82.0% |
Company Size | Count |
---|---|
Small Business | 42 |
Midsize Enterprise | 26 |
Large Enterprise | 69 |
Company Size | Count |
---|---|
Small Business | 39 |
Midsize Enterprise | 32 |
Large Enterprise | 161 |
Microsoft Azure DevOps is a cloud service that enables developers to collaborate on code development projects and create and deploy applications quicker than ever before. The service helps unite developers, project managers, and software development experts through a collaborative experience while using the application. For the users' convenience, Azure DevOps offers the user cloud services through Azure DevOps Services or an on-premises service using Azure DevOps Server. In addition, it supports integration with additional services and adding extensions, including the ability for the user to create their own custom extensions.
Azure DevOps provides a variety of unified features that can be accessed through their web browser or IDE client, such as:
Benefits of Microsoft Azure DevOps
Microsoft Azure DevOps offers many benefits, including:
Reviews from Real Users
Microsoft Azure DevOps stands out among its competitors for a variety of reasons. Two major ones are its ability to forecast how long each task will take and the ability for users to follow the entire development process.
PeerSpot viewers note the effectiveness of this solution. An executive chief operating officer for a cloud provider notes, “We can forecast tasks and the number of hours a task will take and can compare it with how long a task actually takes.”
Carlos H., a product and system director at SPCM, writes, “I think the most usable thing is that you can follow the whole progress of the development process. This makes it very useful for us.”
OpenText Application Quality Management offers centralized data management, traceability, and integration capabilities. It aids in handling requirements, test planning, and defect tracking while supporting both manual and automated testing. Challenges exist in deployment and browser compatibility.
Known for its robust reporting and flexibility, OpenText Application Quality Management is tailored for large organizations requiring a comprehensive solution supporting lifecycle coverage and seamless tool integration. Users can consolidate testing processes, manage requirements, and centralize reporting across manual and automated testing. While some face issues with project tracking, outdated interfaces, and limited browser compatibility beyond Internet Explorer, it remains widely used for regression and performance testing. Integration with tools like JIRA and support for tools such as UFT and ALM PC underscore its utility.
What are the key features of OpenText Application Quality Management?In industries such as finance and healthcare, OpenText Application Quality Management is implemented to ensure rigorous testing standards. It supports test case creation and execution, defect tracking, and requirements management. Integration with JIRA and performance testing tools make it suitable for organizations needing synchronized testing environments.
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.