We performed a comparison between IBM Rational DOORS and Jama Connect based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Requirements Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The shell scripting is the solution's most valuable aspect."
"I really like the customization that can be done using the DOORS Extension Language (DXL)."
"Starting to use the solution is pretty straightforward. There isn't too much of a learning curve."
"The most valuable feature for me is the ability to enter data into one table, or context, and link it across modules."
"The most valuable feature is the management verification and login."
"Compared to other tools that I have used over the past 20 years, DOORS is the best of the best."
"The traceability matrix in DOORS improved our project outcomes. It helps ensure coverage of requirements at different levels, from user requirements to software requirements to test requirements."
"The solution is stable."
"Jama Connect is a good tool for the entire software development cycle."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"It is good at requirements management and test management."
"The most valuable feature is the user-friendly interface."
"It could be more user-friendly. It's not a beautiful tool. The user interface is gray. It has only lists inside, and it's horrible when you want to add tables. It's tough to add tables and manage them. It also becomes difficult when you want to add images."
"The interface needs an area to be able to type your query and actually be able to find them."
"The software and GUI is very outdated."
"There needs to be quicker access to tech support. When I have a two minute question that takes two minutes to answer, it shouldn't take me 45 minutes and/or a few days of callbacks to get to the right technical support person. It's unnecessary and frustrating for the user."
"The user interface for the Change Proposal System could be improved."
"The low performance of the solution is probably because it is quite an old tool."
"It used to be very clunky."
"It would be helpful if Microsoft provided a more user-friendly interface for updating and querying updates. Additionally, if there was a way for users to notify developers of any changes in requirements, it would allow for faster and more efficient updates to the solution's architecture. This could be in the form of a notification system that alerts developers of any changes that need to be made. Additionally, the solution is document-driven and it should be more digital."
"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."
"The initial setup could be better, it's complicated."
"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."
"Test management can be improved. It's not so scalable. The user interface needs to split things into small projects."
"There are some security concerns with Jama Connect, including two-factor enablement."
"The user interface could be modernized and the product lacks project management functionalities."
IBM Rational DOORS is ranked 1st in Application Requirements Management with 51 reviews while Jama Connect is ranked 5th in Application Requirements Management with 9 reviews. IBM Rational DOORS is rated 8.0, while Jama Connect is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of IBM Rational DOORS writes " Offers ability to automate tasks and to track changes within documents and compare different versions of requirements but modeling capabilities could benefit from a web-based tool ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Jama Connect writes "Agile, well structured, and has a great review module, which makes the design reviews smooth". IBM Rational DOORS is most compared with Polarion Requirements, Jira, Helix ALM, IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation and PTC Integrity Requirements Connector, whereas Jama Connect is most compared with Polarion Requirements, Jira, IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation, Microsoft Azure DevOps and Polarion ALM. See our IBM Rational DOORS vs. Jama Connect report.
See our list of best Application Requirements Management vendors.
We monitor all Application Requirements Management 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.