We performed a comparison between Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer and OpenText Silk Central based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Test Management Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It takes away all the time to construct test cases, so it is all automatic now, but it also levels the playing field."
"The ability to create models/diagrams at multiple levels (nest/embed them) helps in taking models from high-level business requirements and building them into detailed requirements models and test models. Plus, it helps reuse lower level models. It also allows maintaining models at appropriate levels, even for very complex systems/solutions."
"Measuring test coverage helps in one of the most challenging tasks. It has logic that can help to select the right set of scenarios and know what coverage it will provide."
"Integration with automation is one of the reasons we started to consider moving to this tool from our original tool for implementing test modeling. ARD appears to have better integration with Selenium. It also has the ability to record scripts/flows using Selenium Builder and import them into ARD, which will then create and optimize a model based on that."
"It gives us an idea of creating the visual diagrams, which are quite easy to use. It is helpful in creating our business processes."
"Technical support is excellent. They provide solutions quickly for issues encountered."
"I like the way Broadcom ARD inserts test cases in execution mode. Also, ARD can be used apart from Broadcom TDM. It's an add-on through which you supply data through ARD test cases when there is a need for extra data."
"The modeling is a game-changer."
"The stability of this solution is very good. In our experience it is approximately ninety-nine percent."
"A template in App Test should be created in advance. This has proven to be time consuming. The process is not fully automated, because there is a lot of manual intervention is required."
"I think it's already coming, but it needs more automation aspects. There is a tab for Automation, but I think it's not robust. I think that it's going to be a crucial element of the tool."
"They do not have an engine to house test scripts to really pull together the testing pieces of it."
"Data flexibility is something which I would like to see, along with more integration with App Test."
"The solution could be more user-friendly. For example, attachments could be icon-based to make it easier for the user to notice them."
"It would help if it would save different subsets of test cases, use cases, etc., of a given diagram, for different purposes and provide an easy way to name those subsets."
"The solution could improve security and authentication."
"Integration with Agile management tools can be improved, i.e., mainly test case maintenance and linking test cases to the automation script."
"We would also like to manage the integration testing end-to-end."
More Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer is ranked 12th in Test Management Tools with 20 reviews while OpenText Silk Central is ranked 21st in Test Management Tools. Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer is rated 8.0, while OpenText Silk Central is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer writes "Easy to use, beneficial test case visibility, and effective support". 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". Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Adaptavist Test Management for Jira, Jira and Sealights, whereas OpenText Silk Central is most compared with OpenText ALM / Quality Center. See our Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer vs. OpenText Silk Central report.
See our list of best Test Management Tools vendors and best Test Design Automation 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.