We performed a comparison between OpenText ALM / Quality Center and Polarion ALM 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."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."
"I found the ease of use most valuable in Micro Focus ALM Quality Center. Creating test cases is easier because the solution allows writing in Excel."
"ALM Quality Center is a reliable, consolidated product."
"The ability to integrate this solution with other applications is helpful. If there is automation, it comes with improved quality and speed."
"Most of the features that I like the best are more on the analytics side."
"As a system administrator, HPE ALM can be flexibly configured so that it can accommodate a variety of defined project lifecycles and test methodologies."
"Quality management, project management from a QA perspective - testing, defect management, how testing relates back to requirements."
"With test execution, you have an option to create custom fields. It is also really user-friendly. With other tools, we only have restricted fields and we cannot customize or add new columns or fields that users can make use of while testing. ALM is very flexible for creating new fields. It is easy for users to understand the application."
"I am impressed with the solution’s stability."
"The initial setup of this solution was straightforward, and there were not too many problems with it."
"It is a very stable solution."
"The most valuable feature is the function of the ALM system."
"The features I find the most valuable are requirement tracking and schematics."
"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."
"We had a nice experience with technical support."
"The tool helped us to more effectively and efficiently gather and structure the information (requirements, test plans, project management data, etc.), and share it with the involved stakeholders in a safe and change-controlled manner."
"ALM uses a waterfall approach. We have some hybrid approaches in the company and need a more agile approach."
"The BPT also known as Business Process Testing can sometimes be very time intensive and sometimes might not be very intuitive to someone who is not familiar with BPT."
"If they could improve their BPT business components that would be good"
"The downside is that the Quality Center's only been available on Windows for years, but not on Mac."
"The integration could be improved because with Agile technology you are working more quickly than with a top-down methodology."
"Certain applications within this solution are not really compatible with certain applications like ERP. The problem is when we're trying to use these applications or devices, the solution itself doesn't scale."
"The solution needs to offer support for Agile. Currently, ALM only supports Waterfall."
"If the solution could create a lighter, more flexible tool with more adaptability to new methodologies such as agile, it would be great."
"Based on my understanding, the tool's integration capabilities with multiple tools is an area of concern that Polarion needs to focus on more."
"One of Polarion's shortcomings would be planning. It can handle plans, but the planning feature is very basic."
"The interface for this solution needs to be made more user-friendly to provide a better user experience."
"The solution can be improved by making it more user-friendly, and a server-based application rather than client based."
"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."
"Technical support needs some improvement."
"The planning and task management aspects of the solution were not that easy."
"The tool needs to improve its planning. It also needs to add more integrations."
More OpenText ALM / Quality Center Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText ALM / Quality Center is ranked 5th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 197 reviews while Polarion ALM is ranked 8th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 17 reviews. OpenText ALM / Quality Center is rated 8.0, while Polarion ALM is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of OpenText ALM / Quality Center writes "Offers features for higher-end traceability and integration with different tools but lacks in scalability ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Polarion ALM writes "Though needing an improvement in reporting and time for extraction of the data, its integration capabilities are good". OpenText ALM / Quality Center is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, OpenText ALM Octane, Jira and Tricentis qTest, whereas Polarion ALM is most compared with Jira, Microsoft Azure DevOps, Codebeamer, PTC Integrity and Atlassian ALM. See our OpenText ALM / Quality Center vs. Polarion ALM 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.
