IT Central Station is now PeerSpot: Here's why

Polarion ALM OverviewUNIXBusinessApplication

Polarion ALM is #7 ranked solution in top Application Lifecycle Management Suites and top Enterprise Agile Planning Tools. PeerSpot users give Polarion ALM an average rating of 8.2 out of 10. Polarion ALM is most commonly compared to Jira: Polarion ALM vs Jira. Polarion ALM is popular among the large enterprise segment, accounting for 77% of users researching this solution on PeerSpot. The top industry researching this solution are professionals from a computer software company, accounting for 23% of all views.
Polarion ALM Buyer's Guide

Download the Polarion ALM Buyer's Guide including reviews and more. Updated: July 2022

What is Polarion ALM?

The world’s first 100% browser-based ALM enterprise solution, which enables seamless collaboration across disparate teams, multi-directionally linked work items, full traceability, accelerated productivity and automated proof of compliance.

Polarion ALM Customers

Engineering Ingegneria Informatica, IBS AG, Zumtobel Group

Polarion ALM Video

Archived Polarion ALM Reviews (more than two years old)

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
Senior Research Engineer at a consultancy with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
The amount of document control, combined with review and release probabilities and signatures is really useful
Pros and Cons
  • "We had a nice experience with technical support."
  • "The ease-of-use could be improved a little."

What is our primary use case?

We mainly use Polarion ALM for requirements engineering as well as task planning and task execution, but we mainly use it as a documentation and traceability tool.

I work in the medical device development field. Even though Polarion is quite expensive, it's quite a good solution for medical device development in general, especially for software development.

Within our previous company, not that many people used Polarion as it was only used within our department relating to medical device development. I'd say around 20 to 30 people were using it. It's hard to say as we had around six licenses with some floating licenses.

What is most valuable?

I like that there is, more or less, a single solution for everything. In regards to Polarion, if you're not experienced, it can be quite complicated, so you may need weeks or even months to familiarize yourself with the tools and how it operates. Once you understand how it works it becomes a very useful tool; we mainly use it for requirements engineering, so for us, the traceability is a really important feature. I also like all of the possibilities for different reports and the option to have a "what you see is what you get" editor for all documents and especially, for the release of documents. 

The amount of document control, combined with review and release probabilities and signatures is really useful. For example, Confluence does not have these capabilities. You would have to install Comala, with its plug-in that is used for document control, and even then, it would not be comparable. Polarion's document control is one of the best that I have used. In terms of development itself, having the work items and requirements altogether in one place and being able to control them by Staples, is really helpful.

What needs improvement?

The ease-of-use could be improved a little, but at the same time, it's a complex tool so that has to be expected; such a complex tool cannot be completely straightforward. 

The license model is okay for large companies but would be quite expensive for smaller enterprises.

Also, the beginner's tutorials are quite outdated — working on versions from 2010 or 2012. More up-to-date tutorials with different use cases would be a nice adjustment.

It's always possible to improve such tools by adding more features and improving automatization. For example, we never tried the connection to build service. I believe it's possible to do that, to automatically link it to the software build process. We only used it more or less manually. It's possible that, that feature could be improved because I believe there was a reason why we didn't do it, but I can't explain in more detail as I was not really involved in the process.

In general, I would like to see improvements on the information and materials.

For how long have I used the solution?

My current company has been using Polarion ALM for quite a long time, since approximately 2012. I personally started working with Polarion ALM four years ago.

Buyer's Guide
Polarion ALM
July 2022
Learn what your peers think about Polarion ALM. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: July 2022.
619,967 professionals have used our research since 2012.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

I don't remember any real bugs. We always had some (more or less) minor questions relating to different issues. I don't completely remember, but we had direct contact to our vendor here in Austria, so in most cases, problems could be solved in a more or less direct way. So no really big problems. 

How are customer service and support?

We had a nice experience with technical support. Contacting them was like gaining secret knowledge because so much information is not published, like macros and snippets of code and so on. If you just ask, they will give you different pieces of code for different purposes — for reports for example. You couldn't find that hidden code on your own but if you ask, Siemens will, more or less, give it to you for free. As it's clear that they don't want to publish everything on their website, just ask if they have a solution that is yet to be published, and maybe they can help you out.

How was the initial setup?

I was not involved in the initial setup. Still, when you're working with Microsoft, creating your own code within the system, you have to be the admin. Also, when updating to a newer version, problems can occur leading to the loss of older, developed pieces of code. It's a small issue but you need to be aware of it in order to handle it properly. Other than that, the setup is quite straightforward. 

What about the implementation team?

Maintenance was distributed between several people. We had one main administrator. We were quite a large company with 1,300 people in total, but there were only around 60 of us working in the medical device domain. We had one central IP infrastructure, but they only provided us with computers to the hardware. We managed the tool within the departments on our own. We had one administrator, who was the master administrator, who did the updates, and so on. We also had several tool administrators. In other words, we were two units within the department and for each unit, we had one administrator.

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

The license model is okay for large companies but would be quite expensive for smaller enterprises.

What other advice do I have?

If you're a beginner to Life Cycle Requirements Engineering in general, I'd recommend that you familiarize yourself with the basics of requirement engineering in order to gain independence of the tool itself. Eventually, when you start using Polarion, start from the very beginning. Even though the tutorials are out-of-date, they are still helpful. 

We also used our vendors as our trainers and teachers. We booked them for three or four days to get a proper introduction to Polarion. Starting off with an expert is a really good idea, it will cost you, but it will save you so much time. One expert instructor can teach more than 20 workers at once, saving you hours or even weeks.

I would rate Polarion really quite high. We were happy with it, and nowadays, without this type of tool, it's not possible to develop medical devices independently of software or hardware. I would give Polarion a rating of nine out of 10.

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
Consultant
Enables us to circulate a work ticket within teams but it's not a complete solution
Pros and Cons
  • "You can see the work ticket and you can circulate that within the teams. You can define your flows, customize according to your needs, and you can create dashboards and create the reports according to your needs."
  • "The most important thing for them to improve should be platform-independent features. They should also provide extensive pipelines and release pipelines that we can define and we can work on."

What is our primary use case?

I use the on-prem deployment model. Our primary use case is for application life cycle management, DevOps, and all the application requirements.

What is most valuable?

You can see the work ticket and you can circulate that within the teams. You can define your flows, customize according to your needs, and you can create dashboards and create the reports according to your needs. The version is not a distributed version of those systems. I think after requiring the kit by Microsoft most of the parties who are already using different ALM tools, they are moving towards Azure DevOps. Microsoft should be dedicated to moving the teams, creating new features, and making the Azure DevOps most straight-form independent. I have been using Siemens Polarion for three years but I haven't found out a way that you can use it in your own methodology for content management systems. If you were to say that everything is integrated and it's a complete solution, I would say it's not.

What needs improvement?

The most important thing for them to improve should be platform-independent features. They should also provide extensive pipelines and release pipelines that we can define and we can work on. 

Another area of improvement is integration with external tools and external platforms like Linux, Mac, and other stuff. Most of the teams are basically moving towards faster development. Everything should be flexible. All the tasks you can see in AWS and Azure, you would just need to drag and drop and release into the pipeline.

Right now, if you can evaluate the tools, then I think that as for the cost differences and for the usability, and other things concerned, so I will rate AWS at the first, Azure second, and then Atlassian tools and then Siemens would be fourth or fifth. 

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It has worked well. Communication, dashboarding, reporting, content management, workflows, and you are creating user stories and you'll communicate within teams creating different divisions, mapping, queuing; for these kinds of things, that is good.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Scalability is good. It's easy to expand it. 

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was straightforward as far as the installation and management. It's easy to establish, setup, and deploy. 

The deployment took two to three hours. 

What other advice do I have?

I would rate it a five out of ten. I would like to see better integration and better extensivity of tasks. The costs are not proportionate to the features it offers. 

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
Buyer's Guide
Polarion ALM
July 2022
Learn what your peers think about Polarion ALM. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: July 2022.
619,967 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Assistant Engineer at Zsikla István
Real User
Straightforward setup and the support is ok, but usability is hindered by too many items in one LiveDoc
Pros and Cons
  • "The initial setup of this solution was straightforward, and there were not too many problems with it."
  • "The interface for this solution needs to be made more user-friendly to provide a better user experience."

What is our primary use case?

We primarily use this solution for requirement engineering. 

Our deployment is on a private cloud from Siemens. 

What needs improvement?

The interface for this solution needs to be made more user-friendly to provide a better user experience.

If we have too many work items in one LiveDoc then usage can be limited because the loading times are very slow.

In the next release of this solution, I would like to see the limitations removed.

There should be a better facility for importing, such as from an IBM Rational Doors document.

The configuration would be much simpler if it had limited functions for synchronizing with JIRA, for example.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using this solution for two years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability of this solution is not bad, but it could be better. If there are too many work items in one LiveDoc then usage is limited, which requires a workaround.

You have to take care not to use more than 1000 workitems in one livedoc, in other case the loading times will be so long, that you get timeouts for them. Baseline comparisons and other oprations will be timeouted also.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

I don't think that this solution scales well. The problem is that they don't have the memory being used entirely. I think that it has something to do with the architecture.

I think that we have plans to increase usage, although I do not have the details as to how. I've got some information from the Siemens colleagues and I see that we cannot improve too much, or in too many ways, due to limitations in the architecture. It means that we have to split our project and use something with fewer objects in it.

There are approximately ten people using this solution.

How are customer service and technical support?

Technical support for this solution is ok. 

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup of this solution was straightforward, and there were not too many problems with it. The process took a few hours.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

I know of some other solutions, but they are different. For example, I think that IBM Rational DOORS is much better for requirements engineering, but it lacks other capabilities from Polarion. Merck may be better. It seems nice and seems to have the same capabilities, but I only have limited experience with it.

What other advice do I have?

My advice to anybody who is implementing this solution is to use less than one thousand work items in one LiveDoc. Otherwise, their experience may be poor. 

I would rate this solution a five out of ten.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
Buyer's Guide
Download our free Polarion ALM Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.
Updated: July 2022
Buyer's Guide
Download our free Polarion ALM Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.