We performed a comparison between Codebeamer and OpenText ALM / Quality Center based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The traceability is so simple that I don't need to do any additional configurations related to traceability."
"The solution easily replaces IBM DOORS, which no longer offers maintenance in China."
"There is a lot of complexity involved, meaning it can do many things, which can be quite useful."
"Codebeamer's API-based integration and many other integration aspects with other solutions are very powerful."
"It is a stable solution."
"The platform provided the flexibility to expand our business processes, accommodating or altering them to suit the requirements of a changing environment."
"You can track the metrics in the Agile dashboard very easily."
"One of the most valuable features of Codebeamer is its strong performance."
"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 they do best is test management. That's their strong point."
"It's easy to create defects and easy to sync them up with a developer. Immediately, once created, it will trigger an email to the developer and we'll start a conversation with the developer regarding the requirements that have not been matched."
"Templates: Allows us to standardize fields, workflows throughout hundreds of HPE ALM projects."
"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."
"Lab Management is a valuable feature, because you have a 360 view."
"Reporting was the main thing because, at my level, I was looking for a picture of exactly what the coverage was, which areas were tested, and where the gaps were. The reporting also allowed me to see test planning and test cases across the landscape."
"As a system administrator, HPE ALM can be flexibly configured so that it can accommodate a variety of defined project lifecycles and test methodologies."
"It's still a fairly new tool that lacks maturity right now."
"The product's UI is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"We would like to see more industry-specific features that are tailored to the vertical markets."
"The search and replace feature within the tool itself could be improved."
"Usability needs to be improved."
"It would be helpful if Codebeamer's overall processing and integration with software like Jira could be improved."
"I would like to see more, easily trackable reports."
"During migrations from other platforms to CodeBeamer, there have been instances where we encountered issues that required redoing certain tasks."
"Only Internet Explorer is supported. That is a big problem. They don't support Chrome and Firefox and so on."
"I'm looking at more towards something more from a DevOps perspective. For example, how to pull the DevOps ecosystem into the Micro Focus ALM."
"Browser support needs improvement. Currently, it can only run on IE, Internet Explorer. It doesn't work on Firefox, doesn't work on Chrome, doesn't work on a Mac book. Those are the new technologies where most companies move towards. That's been outstanding for quite a while before it even became Micro Focus tools when it was still HP. Even before HP, that's always been an issue."
"Micro Focus is an expensive tool."
"If they could improve their BPT business components that would be good"
"It's not intuitive in that way, which has always been a problem, especially with business users."
"If the solution could create a lighter, more flexible tool with more adaptability to new methodologies such as agile, it would be great."
"The integration could be improved because with Agile technology you are working more quickly than with a top-down methodology."
More OpenText ALM / Quality Center Pricing and Cost Advice →
Codebeamer is ranked 9th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 10 reviews while OpenText ALM / Quality Center is ranked 5th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 197 reviews. Codebeamer is rated 7.8, while OpenText ALM / Quality Center is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Codebeamer writes "Has good technical support services, but the migration process needs improvement". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText ALM / Quality Center writes "Offers features for higher-end traceability and integration with different tools but lacks in scalability ". Codebeamer is most compared with PTC Integrity, Polarion ALM, Microsoft Azure DevOps, Jira and Parasoft Development Testing Platform, whereas OpenText ALM / Quality Center is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, OpenText ALM Octane, Jira, Tricentis qTest and Zephyr Enterprise. See our Codebeamer vs. OpenText ALM / Quality Center report.
See our list of best Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites vendors.
We monitor all Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
