OpenText Application Quality Management Reviews

We are a partner in a smaller company in Denmark. Previously, we were a very strong partner with HPE until it was sold to Micro Focus. We did a lot of MSP hosting of ALM and worked extensively with LoadRunner, the functional testing solution. 

We have significant experience, although it is not our main focus currently. Many large customers in Denmark use Micro Focus products, including ALM. We definitely use them, though we are not an MSP, as we used to host ALM for about ten customers.

We have done some work with companies, probably four or five years ago and found the ability to manage multiple releases simultaneously as a main advantage, especially in complex programs with multiple concurrent releases. 

Running automated tests against back-level versions in certain environments is possible, and newer versions can be tested as well. It creates constant visibility into the test process, showing the status, bugs, and automated test results. 

It is a solid product in large corporations in Denmark, ensuring everyone knows where the process stands. There is a good understanding of what is critical, allowing prioritization of test cases.

I am currently working a lot, having started using Amazon Prime recently. The user I worked for before has used it for four years. We have features like the ping feature and CVC, as well as the ability to download test cases. We can upload test cases and create requirements for stability metrics to ensure all the requirements are covered. 

It also contains information that allows us to execute automation on all six servers. Most clients are moving out of AMM, but they are exploring other tools like Tutor and Octane, although I'm unsure why. Based on the requirements, we write plans for reviews. 

We also use Microsoft Excel plugins to approach cases, operating the spaces. We applied some tool insulators to download the spaces. We ensure the draft test is executed correctly once the application is running and check the current status.

We have a ping feature similar to CVC and can download and upload test cases. We can create a requirement for stability metrics with the test cases to ensure all requirements are covered. It contains information that allows us to execute automation on all six servers. 

Most clients are moving out of AMM and exploring tools like Tutor and Octane. We are not managing directly as people use test data for defects. We handle requests and examinations and manage them. However, people are opting for tools like Jira for management.

Mine is a testing project. All my requirements, test cases, test executions, and results are maintained within OpenText ALM Quality Center. Both automated and manual testing results are generated from there.

OpenText ALM Quality Center is highly customizable. We can add a lot of fields and customization into the system. It allows us to maintain all requirements, test cases, test executions, and results. Both automated and manual testing results are managed, which is beneficial. The integration with internal applications and CollabNet is made possible through exposed APIs, allowing necessary integrations.

We used ALM, specifically ALM Octane Test Manager. We utilized all the modules when we purchased a full license. However, after they were sold, we realized that we could explore other tools. We decided to update and now use Jira, which has its own developers and tools. We are happy with this change as it doesn't require any payment.

It was good when we used it, and Jira is also providing similar features now. Jira integrates with automation tools and is open-source. I was an admin for ALM and used it to monitor everything. 

However, I currently don't have the time to use or update it and am not actively using it anymore.

We use ALM to record our testing results. Our company uses SAP, and during implementation, we perform implementation testing and utilize ALM to record the results.

It is a good tool for managing testing. We can easily download the data and manage profiles.

We use OpenText ALM Quality Center for defect tracking and test management. We test the software which we get from our suppliers and do the tests and test management.

In the beginning, OpenText ALM significantly impacted our project by reducing the time needed to handle defects to ten percent of the time it took before.

After that the reporting helped very much getting approvals from departments and auditors.

I use the solution in my company for test management. The tool is basically used for the testing process.

The tool has some limitations for the dashboard, especially when it comes to 20 or 25 of them, which is sometimes not enough, and one may have to use a custom Excel to help extend the dashboard.

The tool needs improvements since it is an old technology. OpenText ALM / Quality Center's improved version is ALM Octane but it does not support some of the traditional parts of the original product. Some of the traditional parts are missing in a lot of areas of OpenText ALM / Quality Center. It is difficult to directly transfer OpenText ALM / Quality Center to ALM Octane. Some of the classic OEMs have limitations, especially when used in an IDE network.

There is a need for the tool to check where changes in UI or UX need to be made. The technology used for UI and UX are not user-friendly.

Our primary use case for OpenText ALM is for automation use cases. We can map all the test cases with the requirements. The automation test cases allow the business to clearly see what is automated.

OpenText ALM helps my organization by allowing us to capture requirements and map them to the test cases, including automation test cases. 

It also allows us to schedule test runs and manage everything through ALM. It provides a good return on investment since the business can clearly see what is automated and what is not, as well as check the defects raised in ALM.