We performed a comparison between Jama Connect and OpenText ALM Octane 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 most valuable feature is the user-friendly interface."
"It is good at requirements management and test management."
"I like Jama Connect because it's easy to use and understand. The widgets are great, and linking is straightforward. The solution is not complex compared to its competitors."
"Technical support answers fairly quickly compared to others like IBM or Atlassian. They also offer quite a good knowledge base for advanced cases and how to plan it, etc. via videos that they provide. They are quite useful."
"Provides suitable tools for managing regulatory requirements."
"You can get full traceability with any other system. It also includes a test module, and you build the traceability matrix incrementally throughout the development process."
"Jama Connect is a good tool for the entire software development cycle."
"The way testing is closely tied into the product Backlog has made it more intuitive, or easier to manage the relationship between building out an application and testing it. In other tools, that is more segregated. The way it's designed in Octane, people have said it makes more sense to them, and that it's easier for them to understand their data and to maintain and test their solutions."
"The platform's most valuable feature is pipeline integration or continuous integration services."
"The interface is user-friendly."
"The most useful feature of Micro Focus ALM Octane is the dashboards, they are easy to use."
"The user experience is a lot better than any tool that I have used before. Overall, it is great. It has a smooth interface, which is very user-friendly. It makes it easier to work together and have more transparency and customization, which is very good."
"It is a very stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"I like the fact that you can use it on top of Jira."
"An improvement on previous versions because it comes as preconfigured as possible."
"Test management can be improved. It's not so scalable. The user interface needs to split things into small projects."
"The user interface could be modernized and the product lacks project management functionalities."
"The initial setup could be better, it's complicated."
"There are some security concerns with Jama Connect, including two-factor enablement."
"t is rather slow, so the speed of the process and consuming information should be improved. It doesn't have a nice way of viewing information. We would like to see better interfaces for consuming information."
"I believe one of the weak points is the reporting side. You must export inter-readable reports from Jama if you do not use the system as a repository for your design history file. Jama is great if you keep it in Jama, but reporting out requires some customization to get it right."
"I think there's room for improvement, especially with the review process. Reviews should be integrated with requirement evaluation instead of being separate from it. The review should not run parallel to the requirement."
"I have inquired about pricing for this solution but have not yet heard anything, so their response time in this regard is something that should be improved."
"Currently, Micro Focus ALM Octane is considered an old-world tool in the industry and lacks the perception of being a new-age tool among its customers."
"The biggest problem with ALM Octane is that it's very complex, so it's difficult to use and scale."
"The cluster architecture that we implemented was server to server communication: Octane application to Elasticsearch and Elasticsearch to another Elasticsearch service. Recently, we found this is a security gap. The Octane application is interacting with Elasticsearch server, but that was missing from the requirements and prerequisites in the setup. The Micro Focus team has not given advice on how to implement authentication-based communication between Octane to Elasticsearch, and we found it as a gap later, then our security team asked us to fix that gap. So, there was a lot of time spent on rework."
"We’d like to see Platform One/Iron Bank compliant containers."
"Technical support can be slow."
"There is an opportunity for them to do a little more with the dashboarding. We still feel that HPE Quality Center/HPE ALM reporting is very powerful. We talked with R&D, and there are some things on their roadmap, but at the same time, their strategy is to connect Octane with visualization tools such as Power BI."
"The solution should improve by adding scrum board-like functionality."
"Development of extensions or connections to GitHub actions could be better. Better integration with Azure DevOps would also help."
Jama Connect is ranked 13th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 9 reviews while OpenText ALM Octane is ranked 7th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 38 reviews. Jama Connect is rated 7.4, while OpenText ALM Octane is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Jama Connect writes "Agile, well structured, and has a great review module, which makes the design reviews smooth". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText ALM Octane writes "Reporting engine, widgets, and dashboards are a huge plus, and powerful REST interface means we can interact with other tools". Jama Connect is most compared with IBM Rational DOORS, Polarion Requirements, Jira, IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation and Microsoft Azure DevOps, whereas OpenText ALM Octane is most compared with Jira, OpenText ALM / Quality Center, Microsoft Azure DevOps, Rally Software and GitLab. See our Jama Connect vs. OpenText ALM Octane 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.