We changed our name from IT Central Station: Here's why
Global Lead at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
User-friendly and stable but needs better automation capabilities
Pros and Cons
  • "The solution is very user-friendly."
  • "We are looking for more automation capabilities."

What is our primary use case?

We're pretty heavily dependent upon that tool, in terms of the test management overall and using UFT as an automation, as well.

What is most valuable?

The product overall it's pretty good. 

From a DevOps perspective, there are a lot of opportunities that they can give in build solutions.

The solution is stable. 

The solution is very user-friendly.

What needs improvement?

We are looking for tools that offer quick automation for using a low-code, no-code, model testing, et cetera, which can reach more non-legacy technologies.

We are looking for more automation capabilities.

We would like end-to-end agile delivery, which is coming up. I can't comment on if it will properly suit us or offer the integration with other technologies, such as  Service Now or Azure Boards, et cetera. I've seen a few integration issues. It's my understanding that we have to go for third-party add-ons.

We are still evaluating. I don't have many answers yet however, it does look like we have to rely on third-party add-ons to get this integration done. We'd like to have more built-in capabilities. 

If they can bring in inbuilt APIs to connect to this, at least the standard technologies, like Service Now, Azure Boards, JTOC conference, et cetera, that'll be great. 

As we are behind a few versions, I don't know whether anything available is in the latest version in regards to business process testing, where you can sequence the steps and having a collaboration by notifications et cetera, that would be ideal.

We are working to get to the latest version to see what else may have been added or adjusted. 

For how long have I used the solution?

We have been using the solution pretty much for 15 years now.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

In terms of stability, there's no issue. Unfortunately, due to quite a lot of projects going on year over year, we are a little bit behind on the versions. We are on the 12.2. We have to move to 15.5 from QC. While it's a big jump, we are evaluating it as a big jump and see it as a good thing. However, there is the chance that we choose some other products and move from Micro Focus.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

I can't comment much on pricing. The reason is, we get the pricing for Micro Focus through SAP as part of an enterprise contract. We don't actually get it from Microsoft Focus and due to the fact that there's a part of the SAP that's 15 years old, we have one of the cheapest licenses probably in the world. That's one of the reasons why it's hard for us to make a business case to move to any other product at the moment, as the licensing is quite cheap for us.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We are currently evaluating Tricentis Tosca.

What other advice do I have?

We are customers and end-users.

From my perspective, it's a great tool, however, the world is now moving towards DevOps. That said, they could bring some capabilities with open-source tools like Azure DevOps. It might add better value for users. That said, this solution is a very stable, very user-friendly tool. The integration, however, is an issue.

If somebody's looking for an independent tool for test management, it's good, however, for other areas where you need to get the full integration without investment on other add-ons, this solution won't easily allow this.

I'd rate the solution at a seven out of ten.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate
Software Engineer
Real User
Integrates with Jira, good interface, and stable, but it's outdated and needs to be more modern
Pros and Cons
  • "I like that it integrates with the Jira solutions."
  • "I would like to be able to search easier, not just do SQL queries, being able to do free keyword searches on the data. That's valuable."

What is our primary use case?

We have it deployed in our Data Center and it integrates with it to write a custom application on it. You have to use a sole technology, which is risky. It takes more advanced developers than someone who does JavaScript and makes web pages.

Micro Focus is selling two test management solutions, ALM/Quality Center and ALM Octane, TM, which are identical, except ones built on newer technology

What is most valuable?

The user interface is fully web-capable. It's a website, and it runs on a browser.

I like that it integrates with the Jira solutions. Similar to SmartBear TestComplete, and another solution, where they add test management into Jira. 

All of them use the same data model. You basically have a release, a cycle, and then you have requirements, you attach those to the cycle, then you have tests, and test sets made of tests. It's all the exact same thing. They got it right because everyone has copied it.

What needs improvement?

ALM is a dated application, and I am researching to see what other solutions are available.

We would like to upgrade to be more modern.

If you want to extend it, they use ActiveX which was put into a browser to go to the internet, but it never had security built into it. It is what Microsoft Office is based on.

It hasn't kept up, while others have and are adding new features and tools.

I would like to be able to use free keyword searches, where you're not just limited to SQL queries.

The software gets leapfrogged because you make a lot of investment in building something. You're selling it for five years, and meanwhile, all of the other tools are improving. Another vendor comes along to make the same thing that took you three years to build, he built it in six months.

It's all easier to make. It's always a cycle. I just look around to see where we are at in that cycle with test management software.

I would like to be able to search easier, not just do SQL queries, being able to do free keyword searches on the data. That's valuable.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been working with Micro Focus ALM Quality Center for a decade.

We are using the latest version.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability of this solution is good. We never experienced any issues with bugs, glitches, or any crashes.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

We have not issues with the scalability of Micro Focus ALM Quality Center. It is a scalable product.

In a given day, we have 50 persistent users, then another day you may have 75 to 100 people with 30 users who are testers.

How are customer service and technical support?

We have a contractor who supports us. The company's technical support, and it all goes through them. They are the middleman to us. They are on our site, and they run it.

How was the initial setup?

I was not involved in the initial setup. It was set up by other people.

What other advice do I have?

When I look back to four or five years ago, it would have been rated a 10, but now I think that it has 's probably fallen back to a six or a seven out of ten. I would rate Micros Focus ALM Quality a six out of ten.

I think if you look at the Gartner Magic Quadrant Reports, it pretty much indicates that as well.

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.
Flag as inappropriate
Learn what your peers think about Micro Focus ALM Quality Center. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: January 2022.
564,997 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Talent Acquisition Specialist at a computer software company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
A good and very stable product for maintaining your test cases and requirements
Pros and Cons
  • "You can maintain your test cases and requirements. You can also log the defects in it and make the traceability metrics out of it. There are all sorts of things you can do in this. It is not that complex to use. In terms of user experience, it is very simple to adopt. It is a good product."
  • "The Agile methodology is now being used across all the organizations, but in this solution, we don't have a dashboard like Jira. In Jira, you can move your product backlogs from one space to another and see the progress, that is, whether a backlog is in the development stage or testing stage. Micro Focus ALM Quality Center does not have this feature. It is typically very straightforward. You just execute the test cases from it, and you just make them pass, fail, or whatever. They can also improve its integration with Jira. The browser support needs to be improved in this because it supports only Internet Explorer as of now. It does not have support for Firefox, Chrome, Safari, or any other browser. There are also some performance issues in it. Let's say that you are doing the testing, and you found something and are logging the defect. When you try to attach several or multiple screenshots with the defect, it slows down, which is a very common problem people face. I would like them to include a functionality where I am able to see the reports across all the projects. When you have multiple projects, being a manager, I would like to see the reports across all the projects. Currently, there is no single sign-on through which we can get all the information at one place. You need to log into it project-wise. If you have ten projects, you can't view the information in one dashboard."

What is our primary use case?

It is a test management tool where you write the test plan, test scripts, and test cases. You can log the defects that you found during the testing. You can also use it with other integrations, such as automation using UFT, where you execute the scripts from Micro Focus ALM Quality Center. We are using the latest version of this solution.

What is most valuable?

You can maintain your test cases and requirements. You can also log the defects in it and make the traceability metrics out of it. There are all sorts of things you can do in this.

It is not that complex to use. In terms of user experience, it is very simple to adopt. It is a good product.

What needs improvement?

The Agile methodology is now being used across all the organizations, but in this solution, we don't have a dashboard like Jira. In Jira, you can move your product backlogs from one space to another and see the progress, that is, whether a backlog is in the development stage or testing stage. Micro Focus ALM Quality Center does not have this feature. It is typically very straightforward. You just execute the test cases from it, and you just make them pass, fail, or whatever. They can also improve its integration with Jira.

The browser support needs to be improved in this because it supports only Internet Explorer as of now. It does not have support for Firefox, Chrome, Safari, or any other browser. 

There are also some performance issues in it. Let's say that you are doing the testing, and you found something and are logging the defect. When you try to attach several or multiple screenshots with the defect, it slows down, which is a very common problem people face.

I would like them to include a functionality where I am able to see the reports across all the projects. When you have multiple projects, being a manager, I would like to see the reports across all the projects. Currently, there is no single sign-on through which we can get all the information at one place. You need to log into it project-wise. If you have ten projects, you can't view the information in one dashboard.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using this solution for more than 12 years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It is a very stable product. It is a very old product.

How are customer service and technical support?

Whenever I face any issue or require an item for automation, such as for integrating Excel support, I can get it in the resource library. It has a resource library where you can get all of the stuff.

I don't have any direct contact with Micro Focus support. For any issues that I face while using the product, we have a ticketing system in my company. I just need to log the ticket, and the right person will resolve it. They might be contacting Micro Focus.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is pretty simple.

What other advice do I have?

I would highly recommend this product because it is a very stable product. Around 70% to 80% of organizations are using this product. It is a very stable and popular product.

I would rate Micro Focus ALM Quality Center an eight out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Private Cloud
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Sr. Solution Architect at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Real User
Top 20
Nice looking dashboard, straightforward to set up, and very stable
Pros and Cons
  • "It has a brand new look and feel. It comes with a new dashboard that looks nice, and you can see exactly what you have been working with."
  • "It is pricey."

What is our primary use case?

We are a consultancy. We use ALM Quality Center for handling waterfall type projects. If our clients are taking an agile approach, then we talk to them about Octane, which is the agile solution.

What is most valuable?

It has a brand new look and feel. It comes with a new dashboard that looks nice, and you can see exactly what you have been working with.

What needs improvement?

It is pricey.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using this solution for at least 20 years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It has been very stable. There was only one minor issue that a customer just stumbled upon. It really wasn't that big of a problem. It was something that was introduced in version 15.01 patch 2 but doesn't appear in version 15.5. It is something that they added to the product or fixed with the product, but the issue is back again.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It is scalable. You can have thousands of users running this product at the same time. 

We are a small consultancy, but we have customers who are running hundreds of thousands of users concurrently with the product and have no problems with it. They are running them on a worldwide basis.

How are customer service and technical support?

Tech support is pretty good overall. There was a time when it wasn't all that great, but it is pretty good right now. It has vastly improved over what it was probably five years ago.

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

Ours is strictly partnership, so we haven't dealt with any other ALM type of products from other vendors.

How was the initial setup?

It is fairly straightforward to set up. I didn't have any problems with it.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

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.

What other advice do I have?

You need to take a look at what you're doing right now and how your test requirements, defects, and so forth are organized. If you can, try to bring them under one umbrella. ALM Quality Center does all of those things. In the past, I found a lot of customers using a variety of tools to do these different things. One for requirements management, one for defects management, one for testing, and so forth. It is much easier if you can bring everything under the same umbrella, that is, ALM Quality Center.

ALM Quality Center is geared towards waterfall type projects, and a lot of customers are moving away from that right now. Octane is a solution for the agile model. In ALM Quality Center, we have what's called a test lab and a test plan so that you can organize your tests. The same capability is not there in Octane. It would be nice to bring that feature over into Octane so that we can easily see what are the tests and organize the tests any way we want.

I would rate Micro Focus ALM Quality Center an eight out of ten.

Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner
David Gorecki
Senior Specialist - Quality Engineer at a financial services firm with 201-500 employees
Real User
Top 5
Not easy to set up or use, UFT tests run poorly, and it does not scale well
Pros and Cons
  • "The integration with UFT is nice."
  • "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."

What is our primary use case?

We use this solution primarily for doing test cases and running UFT cases.

What is most valuable?

The integration with UFT is nice.

What needs improvement?

We are having a lot of problems with this solution. One example is that users are able to run test cases, but the permissions are managed by another group.

I don't have the ability to create test sets.

A lot of the testing steps are ad-hoc in nature where they have a lot of prerequisites, but they don't specify what the prerequisites are.

The organization that I am at is not very good in the sense that even finding test cases that need to be run is very difficult.

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. Specifically, if I move to a screen with a different resolution then it throws things off.

For how long have I used the solution?

I first started using Micro Focus ALM Quality Center in 2011.

We are using version 12. It has a new name, it's called HPE application Lifecycle Management.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability of the hardware is okay. It's just the tool itself is not easy to use at all.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The scalability is not great at all, especially with the licensing model.

How are customer service and technical support?

I have never had to use them because we have an in-house group that manages many of our issues. I don't know what their interactions have been with Micro Focus, but I have personally had never reached out to them.

How was the initial setup?

My experience with it, in general, is that the initial setup is not easy and that upgrades are dreaded. Companies tend to not go through the upgrade process because it causes many different types of issues, especially on the database side. This seems to be a longstanding bug with the management of permissions that goes all the way back to quality center days that have never been addressed. 

I would say that the initial setup is not easy at all.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

The licensing model is an area that can be improved.

The cost of licensing depends on the number of VMs that you are running test cases on and it is not cheap. To the best of my recollection, it is several thousand dollars per license.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We are having a lot of problems with this product and we're now looking at other options.

What other advice do I have?

This is a product that I do not recommend but if someone were in a situation where they were intent on using it, my advice is definitely to plan it out ahead of time. Don't try to wing it and learn it on the fly. Have someone who knows the tool and can set up the proper authorization because otherwise, it will be like ours, which is a mess.

I would rate this solution a three out of ten.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
National Solutions Architect at a computer software company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 5
Lots of features for testing, scalable, and good linkage and traceability between the test cases and the defects
Pros and Cons
  • "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."
  • "It can be quite clunky, and it can easily be configured badly, which I've seen in a couple of places. If it is configured badly, it can be very hard to use. It is not so easy to integrate with other products. I've not used Micro Focus in a proper CI/CD pipeline, and I haven't managed to get that working because that has not been my focus. So, I find it hard. I've often lost the information because it had committed badly. It doesn't commit very well sometimes, but that might have to do with the sites that I was working at and the way they had configured it."

What is our primary use case?

When I use it, it is mostly for test management. The instances I've used are mostly on-prem.

What is most valuable?

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 needs improvement?

It can be quite clunky, and it can easily be configured badly, which I've seen in a couple of places. If it is configured badly, it can be very hard to use. It is not so easy to integrate with other products. I've not used Micro Focus in a proper CI/CD pipeline, and I haven't managed to get that working because that has not been my focus. So, I find it hard. I've often lost the information because it had committed badly. It doesn't commit very well sometimes, but that might have to do with the sites that I was working at and the way they had configured it.  

The feature that I would have liked to see is more integration into CI/CD pipeline and agile pipeline. It should have integration with third-party tools such as Jira, DevOps, and the cross-platform type of thing. The versions I've used are older, so these features may have already been included in the new versions.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using this solution for 10 to 12 years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

I've had many cases where I've lost data. I had bugs where I couldn't record, and the records got lost or locked, but rather than the actual product, it had more to do with the way it was set up at the sites I was working at.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It is scalable. I've seen big organizations using it.

How are customer service and technical support?

I've not had to deal with technical support.

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

I also use Microsoft Azure DevOps. I don't really have a preference. It is horses for courses, and it depends on the type of application you're running. For older style waterfall projects, you can probably go with Micro Focus, barring pricing and others things. For agile or particularly a Microsoft Azure-based product, I would go with DevOps because of the better pipeline and the whole end-to-end integration.

How was the initial setup?

I never had to set it up from scratch.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

I've never been in the procurement process for it. I don't think it is cheap. Some of the features can be quite expensive.

What other advice do I have?

Generally, it is pretty good for what it does. As a standalone tool for managing testing, it is good.

I would give Micro Focus ALM Quality Center an eight out of 10.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Implementor
Flag as inappropriate
Sr. Manager - SAP Authorization & Complaince at a pharma/biotech company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Top 5Leaderboard
Test management is its strong point, but it must have version control and electronic signatures
Pros and Cons
  • "What they do best is test management. That's their strong point."
  • "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."

What is our primary use case?

We use it for managing requirements, testing, and defects.

What is most valuable?

What they do best is test management. That's their strong point.

What needs improvement?

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.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using this solution since 2010.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It is glitching now. We have an older version, and it doesn't work well with the latest version of Windows. It hangs a lot.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It is pretty easy to ask for additional memory. It is implemented in Azure, so we can just ask for additional space.

We have concurrent licenses. If we count the number of users, we have around 350 users. They use it on a daily basis.

How are customer service and technical support?

Our license was procured through SAP. It was indirectly purchased, so it is very difficult to contact the technical team. We have to go through SAP to get feedback on our issues. Support is difficult, not very friendly, just because we have an indirect relationship with Micro Focus.

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

This is the first one that our company used.

How was the initial setup?

It was simple enough. It did not take much time. The first time we used it only for testing. When we used it for requirements management, it was a little bit more difficult, and we had to re-train our users on how to use the tool.

What about the implementation team?

The tool was simple enough to learn by using the manuals. I learned how to configure the tool, and I conducted the company-wide training. I maintain and configure the system.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

It is very expensive as compared to other tools. We didn't get their premier version. It is a lesser version, and to upgrade, there will be an additional cost for us. 

What other advice do I have?

I would recommend others to find another tool because the interface itself is very outdated. It looks very '90s. There are a lot of better, cheaper tools out there. That's all I can say.

I would rate Micro Focus ALM Quality Center a five out of ten. It must have version control and electronic signatures.

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.
Head of SAP/ SAP Solution Architect at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees
MSP
Scalable with a straightforward setup but lacks good technical support
Pros and Cons
  • "The setup is pretty straightforward."
  • "The support is not good and the documentation is not consistent."

What is our primary use case?

We provide support for customers, which require this kind of solution.

What is most valuable?

The setup is pretty straightforward.

The solution can scale.

What needs improvement?

I frankly don't recommend Micro Focus solutions. 

The support is not good and the documentation is not consistent. I even opened the issue to the partner. With the support not being great, we faced some stressful situations with the customer. That's why I'm looking for another partner.

I'd like to see more artificial intelligence and machine learning features implemented in future releases.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using the solution for almost a year.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

I realized there are some bugs in the solution that were not occurring on the last solution. 

Micro Focus bought another company. Since then, my experience hasn't been that great. The quality has dropped. It's not as stable as it used to be. I was expecting it to be more stable.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

For the Quality Center, the scalability is quite good. On Load Runner, as a comparison, I faced one issue related to scalability. We face quite a few problems in that area.

The companies that are using Quality Center are quite sizeable. We have around 20 users on that particular solution.

How are customer service and technical support?

The technical support is not helpful. They aren't responsive or knowledgable and they don't take initiative to solve issues for clients. It can hurt the relationship we have with our clients. We're not satisfied with their level of service.

How was the initial setup?

While the setup is straightforward in general, the configuration is not quite as user-friendly. To configure the solution, you need to have many years of experience with the solution. Those that are new to it may face issues.

In terms of deployment, it takes about three days for the Quality Center installation as a whole. In contrast, Load Runner takes about two days in our case. 

What other advice do I have?

We're a Micro Focus partner.

I'm not sure of which version of the solution we're using. We are configuring the company and we tend to use the latest version of labels.

We work with both cloud and on-premises deployment models.

I don't recommend Micro Focus tools. It's a very strong company nowadays, however, I'm trying to find another partner. For instance, I've researched solutions that are much better than Micro-Focus in SAP scenarios.

I'd advise users looking for a solution to pay attention to their requirements and make sure whichever solution they choose meets them. You'll need to do a lot of research and balance the pros and cons of each option before choosing anything.

Overall, I would rate the solution six out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Hybrid Cloud
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner
Buyer's Guide
Download our free Micro Focus ALM Quality Center Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.