TFS Reviews

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 the core repository for the complete development life cycle. 

The solution helps with pretty much all aspects of the development cycle. This includes using it for QA, testing, development, and the release. It's useful for every aspect of the development cycle.

The initial setup is fairly easy.

The continuous integration and continuous delivery should begin with DSS. It doesn't right now. That needs to be changed.

The phased release process could be better. Instead of shelving the call and unshelving the call, it should be done in phases. In an updated version, this should be something they adjust. It needs a more effective release process. 

There should be management of the project built-in.

I've been using the solution for more than five years.

The stability of the solution is good. There aren't bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze on us. It works. It's good. We haven't had any issues when it comes to stability.

The scalability of the solution is very good. If a company needs to expand outwards and grow they should be able to fairly easily. We've had not trouble with that aspect of the solution.

We don't have technical support for this solution, therefore I can't speak to how knowledgeable or responsive they are.

We are still using TFS, however, we're considering switching to Microsoft Azure DevOps.

The initial setup is not complex. It is very much straightforward. It shouldn't give an organization too many problems.

I didn't deploy this solution, so I can't speak to how long it actually took to do so.

We had the help of consultants from Microsoft. The implementation was five years ago, so I can't recall too many details, however, I believe we were pleased with their work.

Overall the solution is good. It's scalable and stable and has been working well for us. Of course, the phased release could be smoother, and it's something they need to improve upon.

I'd recommend this solution, even though we do plan to move to Microsoft Azure DevOps.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

At my previous company, I was using TFS for managing projects and code.

The most valuable feature is the backlog.

The reporting has improved over time, with the addition of Power BI reports.

There are a lot of places that Microsoft can improve this product, as well as their support.

The program and portfolio planning facility can be improved. As it is now, you can't do portfolio program planning functionality across multiple project Areas (vs. Team areas within a project area) because you cannot link items across projects. Reporting can be done using Power BI, but real time connections are difficult.  You can use connectors and external integrations but you cannot do it with the tool. It needs to be better. 

It is difficult to customize.

I had been using Team Foundation Server for between four and five years.

This is absolutely a stable platform. It is highly available and follows on the environment.

It is possible to scale, albeit tricky. There are between 2,000 and 3,000 users.

Technical support is a challenge. It is a pain to get anything from Microsoft done. For example, working on patches and queries is slow. There was a lot of functionality that we wanted to embed that we had trouble with.

They changed the entire application lifecycle management suite, so it was a challenge to understand and navigate through how things would be done.

It is not a buggy product, but for new functionality, it is really a challenge. Especially in cloud-based deployments, it is even more challenging.

I was using TFS at my previous company and my current organization uses JIRA. I would say that TFS is the more scalable of the two. With JIRA, you really need connectors and things like that. You have to have external addons to make it more scalable.

In terms of usability, JIRA might provide a better user experience but from an organizational and stability point of view, TFS wins hands-down.

Price-wise, TFS is better than JIRA.

Out of the box, the initial setup is easy. However, it is difficult to customize, especially if it is on a cloud. 

TFS is more competitively priced than some other solutions.

My advice to anybody who is implementing this solution is to use as much as possible, out of the box. Customizing it is difficult. It may not necessarily fit everything perfectly and it can be tricky to scale, but not impossible. There are definitely challenges scaling it. That said, the tool from Microsoft does allow you to do things very differently but try to do it in a standard way first.

I would rate this solution an 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.

My primary use case for TFS is to track source code changes, including branching, merging, and comparing changes. I also use it to check in and out code, track changes, and maintain a history of modifications. 

The solution has been valuable in managing source control and tracking code changes, improving code management and development efficiency. However, it has not significantly impacted project delivery timelines or cost efficiency.

The product's most valuable feature is the ability to view and track the history of changes. It allows me to see previous modifications and helps develop similar features by referencing past work.

The product access management features and connectivity need improvement. Rights management is also complex and could be simplified. 

Additional automation features would be beneficial. 

I have been using TFS since the early 2000s.

The solution is generally stable, though connectivity issues have occurred, often related to VPN usage.

I have used a similar solution sparingly.

The initial setup was straightforward: creating a new project, importing code, and setting up branches.

The setup was done in-house.

TFS is effective for code management and tracking but could benefit from improved automation and simplified user management.

Overall, I rate it a seven out of ten. 

My company uses the product for some of our developers who develop software on a server, after which they need to import it before collaborating with their teams. In general, the development team in our company uses the product.

The manageability and performance of the product are areas of concern where improvements are required.

I have experience with TFS, which is now called Azure DevOps Server. I have experience with the product for four or five years. My company is a customer of Microsoft.

Microsoft's support team is big, and we get help from the technical team while being able to use Office 365 and Azure Cloud, considering the licenses my company has purchased. Microsoft's technical team is supportive. Microsoft's technical team is supportive. With the licenses that my company has purchased from Microsoft, our organization gets the technical support to fix our problems directly from Microsoft.

The product's initial setup phase was difficult. It was difficult to control the software version we were using in our company. The tool doesn't offer a program or software to manage it.

I rate the overall tool a six out of ten.

We use the solution to store all the code and designs for software version control.

The solution helps us store multiple software versions as it evolves and develops.

All the essential functions of the solution perform well.

The solution's pricing and setup process needs improvement.

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

The solution is stable. I rate its stability as an eight.

The solution's scalability is a six or seven.

The solution's setup process is quite complex. It keeps updating for new versions, and thus, it becomes complicated to maintain them.

The solution generates an average ROI.

The solution is expensive.

I rate the solution as a seven. I advise others to prefer Azure DevOps as it has better features than TFS.

I use TFS for source control. We are investigating the cloud option.

TFS is used to check source code and revision control. It ensures we do not have to do source control on our own. I am a programmer and the product does exactly what I need from it.

I have been using Team Foundation Server for six years. I use the 2010 version, however, our IT department is using the 2019 version.

This is a stable solution.

I have never run into any limitations. We have three individuals in my department using the solution and another six using it in the IT department.

The initial setup is straightforward.

I understand Microsoft is phasing out TFS in favor of Git, so I would steer anyone interested in TFS to look into Git.

I would rate the product an eight out of ten.