TFS Reviews

I use it  for managing. To manage the project in Git and manage branches in projects. 

Merging branches is definitely one of the more challenging aspects for people new to TFS.

I have been using it for three years. 

Stability is okay. I would rate the stability an eight out of ten. 

I would rate the scalability a six out of ten. Sometimes, a lot of branches get mixed together, making it difficult to use. I remember struggling with these branch management issues some time ago and even wrote about them. It is so hard to review problems in TFS.

There are around 200 end users using this solution in our organization. 

I found Git to be a better overall experience. Merging branches in TFS, especially merging to the master branch, could be quite difficult. Git seemed to handle it more smoothly. However, after two years, the company decided to switch to Git.

For experienced users, it might be manageable, but for non-technical users like nurses, branching and merging in Git proved difficult. They often had to ask for help from team members because they found it challenging.

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

I use this solution in my organization as a product owner who manages backlogs in DevOps. I manage the backlogs items and use it to collaborate with my developers.

There are less than 100 people using this solution in my company.

The solution is deployed on-cloud.

It's user friendly. We haven't had any issues so far. It's flexible. If we need something, we can always contact the owner in our headquarters to make a configuration.

I only use 1% of the functionality, so I am not familiar enough to know what needs to be improved.

I have been using this solution for a couple of years.

It's stable.

It's scalable.

I would rate this solution five out of ten.

TFS is mainly used for day-to-day project management i.e. all the tasks, user stories, and test case management are done on TFS.

The most valuable feature is integration, particularly if you have a .NET application because it nicely integrates the CI/CD pipeline where you can automate your build whenever developers check the code. It also has great integration support with Visual Studio.

TFS isn't a great tool if you're on the cloud, so the cloud version could be improved.

I've been working with TFS for over ten years.

TFS is a Microsoft tool, so it's very straightforward to set up.

TFS is nicely suited for enterprises running Microsoft, but if you're using a different technology, I'd advise exploring other tools as well. I would rate TFS eight out of ten.

I use TFS as a code repository for version control.

The most valuable features of the code check-in and check-out capabilities.

The code branch capability and build features are helpful.

The interface is easy to navigate.

I would like to see the reporting features expanded so that I can see details on the users connected to all of the projects. As it is now, I can see the details of a single project by selecting it. However, I cannot see all of the scheduled projects at once.

I have been using TFS for between seven and eight years.

TFC is a stable solution.

This is not a scalable product. We have about 35 users in our company.

We have not been in contact with technical support.

Prior to TFS, I did not work with another similar product.

The initial setup is easy and can be completed within a day.

The pricing is reasonable at this time. 

We are currently in the process of upgrading to the 2019 version, which has many more features than does the 2017 version.

My advice to anybody who is considering TFS is that once you get used to it, the interface is very easy to navigate.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

Version Control: TFS offers both the centralized “TFVC” version control technology as well as the distributed “Git” version control technology.

TFVC is a file and folder based version control system, which includes the ability to check-out, check-in, label, lock, branch, and merge. The security model is extremely granular allowing permissions to be set at the individual file, folder, or branch level (with inheritance as needed). The Git implementation is comparable to other on-premise Git offerings, such as Bitbucket and GitLab. The Git feature set has improved greatly between the 2013 and 2017 (latest) versions.

Build: The TFS build engine allows us great flexibility in how we perform our builds. While continuous integration (build on check-in) is used throughout the majority of the organization, we also leverage scheduled and manually initiated builds. The build workflow is entirely customizable and extensible to suit any need. Out-of-the-box build workflows in TFS 2013 are very NET-centric, however this has been completely overhauled in the 2015 and 2017 releases of the product. The newer versions of TFS can be used to create builds for virtually any technology stack, such as iOS builds on a Mac, Android builds, Java builds on windows\linux, etc.

.NET API: The ability to hook into TFS with custom a .NET code via API calls is critical. It allows us to automate any and all version control and build operations that we need to. Custom tooling which interfaces with TFS is a major component of our DevOps strategy/code delivery pipeline.

TFS sits at the core of our entire software delivery strategy. Implemented and used properly, it provides a centralized place to store all source code and build information for the entire organization. We always know which version of the code is deployed to which environment and are always in a position to support the production code line. Custom automation surrounding TFS (via the API) has increased the number of code deployments we are able to perform 1000-fold in the past 5 years.

Not all of the functionality, which is exposed by the command line interface (tf.exe) is available in the Visual Studio GUI.

New files/folders added to a branch are not automatically picked up as merge candidates requiring merges to be performed at a higher folder level (annoyance).

A broader view of the system-wide TFVC permissions would be beneficial. Since the security model is so granular, it makes it difficult to pull effective permissions for everything in TFVC into a single report.

I have been a user for ten years. I have been a System Administrator of TFS for eight years.

No. I have experienced no system outages in the TFS systems, which I built and configured myself.

Obviously, a poorly configured server/database instance will have stability problems. However, there is extensive public guidance provided by Microsoft on setup, upgrades, and migrations.

No. However, my user base has always been relatively small:100–200 users.

Excellent. Every ticket which I have submitted to Microsoft Premier support has been responded to very quickly. I have been put in touch with very knowledgeable engineers, and reached a resolution quickly. Post-incident follow-ups and surveys are also performed to ensure that customers have a quality experience.

No.

It really depends on your use case. For a sandbox, you can have TFS up and running with a SQL Express instance in about 1 hour. That’s not a production-ready system, though.

Performing initial (first-time) setups is fairly straightforward – getting properly spec’ed servers/database instances, following the install guide. Performing upgrade/migrations can be complex depending on how much customization that you have to the product and what has changed between versions. If you have a lot of customization, then the upgrades are going to be complicated.

Use the Microsoft recommended “seat-based” licensing model. This allows a single developer with multiple machines to consume only one client license.

We recently looked at moving to GitLab. We chose not to do this because we already have millions of lines of code hosted in TFVC and migrating all of that to Git would be a daunting task with very little value. Since both TFVC and Git are now available and since the feature set is comparable to GitLab, we opted to stay with TFS. Development teams can “choose their own version control technology” between TFVC and Git.

Hire a TFS expert or bring on a consultant. Nothing will ruin your development shop quicker than a poorly implemented version control/build system.

Microsoft premier consulting services is very expensive, but they can typically get you setup from soup-to-nuts in three to four weeks. That will include extensive guidance in how to use the tool. Your internal resources should work very closely with any consultant as a learning experience.

The primary use for TFS is for event planning, including things like writing the user story and then assigning tasks to the developers. Another task is writing test cases, then recording test results, and sending bugs to the team members. The third thing is that we use TFS as part of our CICD pipeline.

As part of our pipeline, we use it for checking in code and it acts as a repository. This leads to the fourth thing we use it for, which is to move the code from dev to QA to production. Essentially, we establish a complete lifecycle using TFS.

We also use it in conjunction with Azure DevOps.

This product brings a lot of discipline and consistency in the way that our developers use their tools. 

The most valuable feature from my point of view is project management, which includes user stories as well as task management. I would say that these features are critical.

I would like to see better integration between TFS and third-party tools such as Jira. For example, integration with SharePoint is not very straightforward and we need to do a lot of manual work.

The user interface could be improved to make it simpler and increase usability. Making it more user-friendly would be a good thing. While it is okay in some regards, it does not compare to tools like Jira. There is some complexity because there are a lot of features, but usability can still be much better and it would be more comfortable to use.

We have been using Team Foundation Server for almost five years.

This product is stable and we have not experienced any issues with it.

The developers are completely dependent on TFS and are using it on a daily basis.

TFS is quite scalable and there are different deployment options that are available. I don't see any problems with scalability. We have between 40 and 45 people in my department who are using TFS.

The support that we received during the initial setup was the only time that we needed to contact them. Beyond that, we didn't have to ask for technical support. I wouldn't refer to our initial support as very technical because it was more about knowing how to perform certain tasks within the tool.

Prior to using TFS, we used CVS as our code repository solution. All of our requirements and bug tracking were done using manual effort. We were using Word documents and things like that. However, all of that has now been put into TFS.

What led us to switch was the ability to track all of the developers' activities. Before this, getting visibility and deliverables was a real pain point. For example, we didn't know how many stories the developers had completed, how much effort has been spent, or where we were with respect to the tasks that were completed by the teams.

I would say that the initial setup is of medium difficulty. You definitely need help from an expert, as it is not like I can just pick it up and start running it. TFS requires a little bit of expert support in setting up, and we received solid support from Microsoft.

Our deployment took place over the course of a week. It was not a week's worth of effort but we had to schedule calls for support. I would say that TFS can be set up and tested in a single day, although it may take up to a week to finalize things.

During our implementation, we requested help directly from Microsoft.

Our in-house DevOps team is responsible for maintenance.

I wouldn't say that this tool is cheap or expensive but in the middle. TFS is definitely not as expensive as some other tools like Rational Team Concert. Basically, I would say that it is affordable.

Professional Services is a separate cost from the standard licensing fees.

My advice to anybody who is considering TFS is that the suitability depends on what technology you are trying to use. For example, if you're using Microsoft technology then it is better to use TFS. If on the other hand, you are developing something outside of Microsoft, perhaps using an open-source tool, then I wouldn't be able to recommend TFS. Instead, I would choose one of the other many third-party tools that are available.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We are using TFS for testing.

The most valuable features of TFS are bug reporting and its high performance.

The overall reports in TFS could improve. Additionally, there should be an easier way to migrate from an older version to a newer one.

In a future release of TFS, they should be more integration and DevOps features added.

I have been using TFS for approximately 13 years.

I rate the stability of TFS a six out of ten.

The scalability of TFS is good.

We have approximately 50 people from our IT teams that are using the solution in my company.

I rate the scalability of TFS a six out of ten.

I have not used the support from TFS.

I previously used Jira. I did not switch solutions, the new company I work for selected TFS.

The initial setup of TFS took a couple of days to implement. The full process was simple.

There are different prices depending on the configurations. There is a free version available. There is no extra cost for the solution. However, the hardware could be something that needs to be considered.

The maintenance of the solution can be done by one or two people.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate TFS an eight out of ten.

Source Code Management: TFS has both Git repository management as well as a TSVS Repository. It is the only source code management tool which supports both repository types and also supports on-premise installation. TFS also has ALM capabilities where business users can enter user stories, and the QA team can track test scripts and issues, where stakeholders can view project statuses effectively.

It is great product with capabilities for SCM, ALM and issue tracking.

Allowed project teams to communicate, collaborate and track tasks, stories, test cases, issues, and defects at a single location (using one tool).

Adding more canned reports to allow querying and reporting data export to Excel etc., which would help management with their reports.

Two years.

No issues have been noticed in stability.

No issues have been noticed in scalability.

Microsoft has good expertise in this product. Sometimes, it takes longer to get the correct resource.

Not applicable.

The TFS installation was easy. We had issues moving TFS from the development domain to the production domain. The domain has challenges as users from development domain have different signatures in production. Microsoft helped in resolving these issues.

Very straightforward pricing. We have an enterprise agreement with Microsoft, where the majority of the product is covered. One good thing is the stakeholder license, which is free for business users. Hence, the cost of the license for only the QA and Development team is around $5.

There is no single product that has both SCM and ALM integrated which can enable us to quickly onboard projects. We use JIRA for certain areas in our business, with GitHub. Great product as well, however we have had some difficulties in configuring workflows.

I suggest giving the product a try first. Reading too much on paper does not tell you the entire story of the product. It is really good to use it if you want to combine both SCM and ALM.