We performed a comparison between OpenText ALM / Quality Center and OpenText Silk Central based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText, IDERA, Microsoft and others in Test Management Tools."Quality management, project management from a QA perspective - testing, defect management, how testing relates back to requirements."
"From reporting to team management, everything is better now."
"I love linking/associating the requirements to a test case. That's where I get to know my requirement coverage, which helps a lot at a practical level. So, we use the traceability and visibility features a lot. This helps us to understand if there are any requirements not linked to any test case, thus not getting tested at all. That missing link is always very visible, which helps us to create our requirement traceability matrix and maintain it in a dynamic way. Even with changing requirements, we can keep on changing or updating the tool."
"Templates: Allows us to standardize fields, workflows throughout hundreds of HPE ALM projects."
"The most valuable feature of Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is its support for many automation technologies."
"As a stand-alone test management tool, it's a good tool."
"As a system administrator, HPE ALM can be flexibly configured so that it can accommodate a variety of defined project lifecycles and test methodologies."
"Cross project customization through template really helps to maintain standards with respect to fields, workflows throughout the available projects."
"The stability of this solution is very good. In our experience it is approximately ninety-nine percent."
"The support is not good and the documentation is not consistent."
"Micro Focus ALM Quality Center should improve the reports. Reporting on tax execution progress against the plan. However, they might have improved over two years since I have used the solution."
"It is nice, but it does have some weaknesses. It's a bit hard to go back and change the requirement tool after setup."
"The product is good, it's great, but when compared to other products with the latest methodologies, or when rating it as a software development tool, then I'll have to rate it with a lower score because there's a lot of other great tools where you can interconnect them, use them, scale them, and leverage. It all depends on the cost."
"It needs Pure-FTPd WebUI and single sign-on."
"We have had a poor experience with customer service and support."
"ALM requires that you install client side components. If your organization does not allow admin rights on your local machine, this means you will need someone to run the installation for you with admin rights. This client side install is also limited to Internet Explorer and does not support any other browsers."
"The UFT tests don't work very well and it seems to depend on things as simple as the screen resolution on a machine that I've moved to."
"We would also like to manage the integration testing end-to-end."
More OpenText ALM / Quality Center Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
OpenText ALM / Quality Center is ranked 1st in Test Management Tools with 197 reviews while OpenText Silk Central is ranked 21st in Test Management Tools. OpenText ALM / Quality Center is rated 8.0, while OpenText Silk Central 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 OpenText Silk Central writes "We have many possibilities to customize the utilization and we can also work easily at database level for custom reporting and to manage additional information and integration". OpenText ALM / Quality Center is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, OpenText ALM Octane, Jira, Tricentis qTest and Polarion ALM, whereas OpenText Silk Central is most compared with .
See our list of best Test Management Tools vendors.
We monitor all Test Management Tools 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.