IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation OverviewUNIXBusinessApplication

IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation is the #3 ranked solution in top Application Requirements Management tools. PeerSpot users give IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation an average rating of 9.0 out of 10. IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation is most commonly compared to IBM Rational DOORS: IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation vs IBM Rational DOORS. IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation is popular among the large enterprise segment, accounting for 79% of users researching this solution on PeerSpot. The top industry researching this solution are professionals from a manufacturing company, accounting for 23% of all views.
Buyer's Guide

Download the Application Requirements Management Buyer's Guide including reviews and more. Updated: December 2022

What is IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation?
IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation offers a smarter way to manage your requirements that can help your teams reduce development costs by up to 57%, accelerate time to market by up to 20%, and lower cost of quality by up to 69%. Designed for collaboration, Rational DOORS Next Generation provides a single platform for managing requirements so that your teams can work more effectively across disciplines, time zones and supply chains.

IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation was previously known as RDNG, Rational Requirements Composer and IBM RRC.

IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation Customers
Major health insurer
IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation Video

IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation Reviews

Filter by:
Filter Reviews
Industry
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Company Size
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Job Level
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Rating
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Considered
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Order by:
Loading...
  • Date
  • Highest Rating
  • Lowest Rating
  • Review Length
Search:
Showingreviews based on the current filters. Reset all filters
Hubert Zenner - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Sales Specialist at a computer software company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Top 5
Offers good scalability as it's easy to expand to different servers
Pros and Cons
  • "IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation is easier to expand to build a backend with several servers, so you can also use it to scale up to several hundreds of users without major problems."
  • "Both the data storage and reporting for this solution need improvement."

What is our primary use case?

IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation is a web-based tool, based on relational databases such as BP2 or MSS cloud, so it's a different approach to work with it, to work over the web. We have all functionality over the web. There's no decline for it, so it's a completely remote working tool.

We have the data on the server with a sizable use case. Now at 47 under two, it is getting better.

What is most valuable?

IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation is easier to expand to build a backend with several servers, so you can also use it to scale up to several hundreds of users without major problems.

What needs improvement?

This solution is currently having some performance issues because they changed the data storage in the back between version 6 and version 7, so it needs some performance improvement.

The data storage is the relational database in the background, and it has changed and needs performance improvement. Performance is a very big thing that is needed when people are writing requirements. They have to wait too long for the page to return and then they don't like it. They are looking for different ways to do and complete their work. Good performance is very essential in this tool, same for DOORS Classic.

There is also a lot of possibilities to improve reporting.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using this solution for six years.

Buyer's Guide
Application Requirements Management
December 2022
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM, Jama, Atlassian and others in Application Requirements Management. Updated: December 2022.
655,994 professionals have used our research since 2012.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

This solution runs normally and is very stable. It's more in the integration with the asset tools in the Jazz platform that there can be some instability when linking different tools in the Jazz platform. If you only use this solution without integration tools, then it's quite stable.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

This solution is easy to expand to different servers. It's easy to split the user load among different servers, so scalability is good.

How are customer service and support?

I have experience with IBM support, working with different people as this is a different technology, but they're very good, and the help I get from them most of the time is very quick. I'm really satisfied with IBM's support on this solution.

How was the initial setup?

Setting up IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation is complex. You have to set up a Jazz Team Server and you have to set up the database. Depending on which tools you use, which database, which operating system: if it's Windows or Linux, etc., it sometimes requires complicated activities to install. Depending on what you install on the Jazz platform, you need the Jazz Team Server, so on the cloud, it's not really working. It's good to have a HTTP proxy in between.

It's a little bit difficult to install it. Normally, it takes half a day to complete the installation if it's a very simple installation. If it's a complex installation, it could take two to three days.

What other advice do I have?

IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation is a different approach than IBM Rational DOORS (Classic). It has the name because the plan was for it to take over the customers from DOORS Classic, but as the functionality is different and not the same as what's on DOORS Classic, both of the tools have their place in the market. It's a different kind of work and it's a different kind of functionality behind DOORS Next Generation vs DOORS Classic.

The first contact with this new DOORS solution was in 2008, but I was not working from 2008 until now, because at the beginning it was very cumbersome to work with it and I had more problems with it than the ability to work.

I've been using the latest version: 7.0.2 with the IPIX 8a, which is the latest IPIX of this version.

We have this solution on-premises. I have here some servers where the IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation is installed, then the Jazz platform. We have DOORS Next Generation, then we also have to complete the Jazz platform here, where it is implemented.

My main recommendation to people looking into implementing IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation vs IBM Rational DOORS (Classic) is DOORS Next Generation.

IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation is the future and it has a lot of very nice features in it. If possible, use it, but if you need specific things which you can do only in DOORS (Classic), then use the classic version. Normally, they should aim for DOORS Next Generation, as it is more future-oriented in the setup.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten. It is very good, but it is not perfect, so not a ten. It is better than DOORS Classic because I know of a lot of problems when working with the Classic version for 20 years. There are all these different things that can go wrong with DOORS Classic.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
Roger Trackwell - PeerSpot reviewer
System Engineering Manager at a wholesaler/distributor with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 10
An industry-leading tool to demonstrate traceability between requirements, with valuable features for tailoring modules and managing several thousand requirements
Pros and Cons
  • "One of the most valuable features is how you can tailor the modules."
  • "The only additional feature would be if it had dynamic linking to other MBSE tool sets or industry-leading tools."

What is our primary use case?

The way system engineering typically works is that your use cases are developed in what we call an MBSE, which is a model-based system engineering tool. Let's say your MBSE tool is MagicDraw. First, you would get and develop a system spec from your customer requirement specifications. Then your requirements engineers would further derive the system spec and set it up in your DOORS environment. Then your architects would start architecting and modeling from that system spec and develop use cases and logic flow diagrams. Then, as those use cases mature, they turn into performance requirements or constraints to help establish your sequence diagrams. The use cases aren't managed in DOORS, they're managed in an MBSE tool, but like I said, the use cases derive requirements that get put into DOORS.

How has it helped my organization?

The biggest thing is that it shows cradle to grave traceability between the initial parent requirement and the lowest level, or what we call a CID, a critical item development spec. You can establish your verification plans in DOORS, and then as you get test results, you can put them in DOORS as a link or as a pointer to where that specific test resides on a company database. Then you can also write compliance rationale and add a column for coding, like pass, fail, green, yellow, red, meets, does not meet, partially meets, or whatever scoring criteria you want to use. Like I said, the best thing about it is that it provides you that visibility of your verification, allowing you to know how close you are to your pre-production activities, prototyping, go ahead, or whatever it is.

What is most valuable?

One of the most valuable features is how you can tailor the modules.
Basically, you can generate any view you need, all in one stop. Polarion, for example, is web-based, so you have to open up a thousand models to try to get the information you want and then stitch it together yourself. Whereas in DOORS, you can create that view and see everything.

Also, I believe DOORS is the industry-leading tool to demonstrate traceability between requirements.

What needs improvement?

I would say the only additional feature would be if it had dynamic linking to other MBSE tool sets or industry-leading tools. That way you could have that link and not have to do a manual insert or translate the data to an Excel-based product and then use the Excel to load into DOORs. 

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been working with this solution for about 15 years. I worked at British Aerospace Engineering for five years, and defense always uses DOORS. It's part of the government contract, they mandate that you use DOORS for your requirements management. I recently left British Aerospace Engineering to work for CNH Industrial. CNH Industrial uses Polarion, but I'm the lead systems engineer for all requirements, development, and management, and we're going to migrate to DOORS.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

DOORS is very stable.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The solution is scalable. We're always evaluating the complexity of different projects. DOORS handles very, very small and easy projects and I've used it where we've designed entire combat vehicle fleets and it manages several thousand requirements. I've been on projects where we've had over 20,000 requirements and it managed them just fine.

I'm currently bringing this solution into my new company, but at my last company we had over a couple hundred users.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

I have been with companies who tried to do it Excel-based. The tool that we currently use right now is called Polarion, it's a Siemens-based product and it's horrible.

How was the initial setup?

DOORS is not the easiest to set up. It is straightforward if you're a good admin.
Once it is set up, it's very powerful and user-friendly. Just like any tool, you have to get the training in it. Even Excel and PowerPoint can be complex for a person who isn't familiar with them.

What about the implementation team?

I believe we handled the deployment in-house.

What other advice do I have?

I would tell people considering this solution that in my 25 years of experience within systems engineering and being heavily involved in requirements, development, sustainability and management, there's not a better tool out there. I've been a chief engineer for 20-something years and to me, DOORS is the gold standard for requirements management. 

I would rate this solution as a ten out of ten.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate
PeerSpot user
Buyer's Guide
Application Requirements Management
December 2022
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM, Jama, Atlassian and others in Application Requirements Management. Updated: December 2022.
655,994 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Kapil Raikar - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Manager – Development, PD, Data Virtulization at a computer software company with 501-1,000 employees
Real User
Top 5Leaderboard
Has the capability to extend or add extensions to the data model
Pros and Cons
  • "There are many good features with DOORS. The solution has a concept of streams and baselines, as well as a concept of components. A component is a subproject inside a project."
  • "There is room for improvement in the APIs that they have exposed for integration."

What is our primary use case?

IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation is the master for capturing requirements. The solution does have other use cases, however, most of our customers are using DOORS as a requirement capturing software. High-level requirements or stakeholder requirements are captured mainly in DOORS.

What is most valuable?

There are many good features with DOORS. The solution has a concept of streams and baselines, as well as a concept of components. A component is a subproject inside a project.

IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation has the capability to extend or add extensions to the data model.

Another valuable feature would be the ease to add custom attributes and new objects with DOORS.

What needs improvement?

The user interface of IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation needs to be improved, there is a lot of scope with this. Even though there have been improvements from versions five, six and seven, the UI still has a lot of bugs. 

There is room for improvement in the APIs that they have exposed for integration. The solution relies on OSLC for integration APIs, but those APIs do not support all the capabilities.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been working with IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation for five years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The solution is not very stable. The performance could improve. We generate a lot of data, causing DOORS to become sluggish with some lags in the software. The earlier version of DOORS Classic handled a large amount of data better.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation can scale up and down, but there is a lot of scope for improvement required in this regard.

How are customer service and support?

Personally, I have not interacted with IBM Rational DOORS' customer service and support. We have our own support team.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is medium in complexity. It is not straightforward. The admin console itself is a little tricky to understand within the whole licensing model and user access control.

I would rate the initial setup a four point five out of five.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

From what I know of Jama Connect, Micro Focus, and Inflectra, DOORS Next Generation is the number one requirement management software. There are other product options, but I believe that DOORS is the best offer out there.

What other advice do I have?

Overall, I would rate IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation an eight out of 10.

Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Integrator
Flag as inappropriate
PeerSpot user