We performed a comparison between OpenText ALM / Quality Center and PractiTest based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Atlassian, Nutanix and others in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites."Ability to customize modules, particularly Defect Tracking module on company specific needs"
"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."
"Easily integrates with Oracle e-Business Suite."
"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."
"I like the traceability, especially between requirements, testing, and defects."
"The independent view of elevated access is good."
"The most valuable feature of Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is its support for many automation technologies."
"The tools could be useful if we were utilizing them more effectively"
"The most valuable feature is the way the libraries are structured so that they were not folder driven."
"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."
"Micro Focus ALM Quality Center could improve its marketing. For example, Tricentis is much better at letting the market know about new solutions and updates. The migration of the tool could improve, but it can be difficult."
"Client-side ActiveX with patch upgrades"
"The solution needs to offer support for Agile. Currently, ALM only supports Waterfall."
"I'd like to be able to improve how our QA department uses the tool, by getting better educational resources, documentation to help with competencies for my testers."
"An area for improvement in Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is not being able to update the Excel sheet where I wrote the test cases. Whenever I update some test cases, I'm unsuccessful because there is overlapping data or missing cases from the sheet."
"Quality Center's UI is outdated, and it's a little bit slow on the login part and different parts of the application. That's why we're switching solutions. I believe most companies are switching to Octane or something else. Micro Focus should enhance the interface and reports."
"If they could improve their BPT business components that would be good"
"It doesn't allow you to connect to multiple different tracking tools."
More OpenText ALM / Quality Center Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
OpenText ALM / Quality Center is ranked 6th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 197 reviews while PractiTest is ranked 20th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites. OpenText ALM / Quality Center is rated 8.0, while PractiTest is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of OpenText ALM / Quality Center writes "Offers features for higher-end traceability and integration with different tools but lacks in scalability ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of PractiTest writes "Offers one click graphical dashboard reports and advanced customization". OpenText ALM / Quality Center is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, OpenText ALM Octane, Jira, Tricentis qTest and Zephyr Enterprise, whereas PractiTest is most compared with TestRail, Zephyr Enterprise, Jira and Microsoft Azure DevOps.
See our list of best Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites vendors and best Test Management Tools 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.
