We performed a comparison between OpenText ALM / Quality Center and Visual Studio Test Professional 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 is stable and reliable."
"I like that it integrates with the Jira solutions."
"I personally found the defect tracking feature very useful in my ongoing project."
"It's basically the way to show the work that we do as QA testers, and to have a historical view of those executions."
"It provides visibility on release status and readiness."
"It has a brand new look and feel. It comes with a new dashboard that looks nice, and you can see exactly what you have been working with."
"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."
"Defect management is very good."
"The most valuable feature of Visual Studio Test Professional is its ease of use."
"The most valuable features of the solution are its ease of use and availability."
"User-friendly ID and direct integration with GitHub are the most valuable."
"Easy to use and easily scalable."
"Visual Studio is an exemplary integrated development environment that stands out due to its exceptional features. It allows for the seamless selection of the appropriate programming language for the specific development tasks at hand. This facilitates a swift and effortless transition between languages, providing a highly efficient development experience."
"The ability to quickly make your own components has been valuable."
"Code testing is the most valuable feature of this solution for developing software."
"The initial setup is easy. It's easy to configure."
"Micro Focus ALM Quality Center could improve how the automation process works. Addiotnlally, the parallel execution needs to be optimized. For example, if multiple users, which are two or more users, are doing an execution, while we execute the cases, I have seen some issues in the progress."
"I would like to be able to search easier, not just do SQL queries, being able to do free keyword searches on the data. That's valuable."
"The QA needs improvement."
"ALM uses a waterfall approach. We have some hybrid approaches in the company and need a more agile approach."
"The support is not good and the documentation is not consistent."
"If the solution could create a lighter, more flexible tool with more adaptability to new methodologies such as agile, it would be great."
"Quality Center's UI is outdated, and it's a little bit slow on the login part and different parts of the application. That's why we're switching solutions. I believe most companies are switching to Octane or something else. Micro Focus should enhance the interface and reports."
"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 server that we use is very slow so that is concerning for us."
"The service right now is far too expensive. You need to pay per user."
"The pricing of this solution should be lowered."
"It would be great to support other languages and applications, and that is one of the things we can improve."
"It is hard to learn, and you need to invest time to understand it."
"The price could be improved."
"The solution’s stability could be improved."
"I would like to see more integration in the solution."
More OpenText ALM / Quality Center Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Visual Studio Test Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText ALM / Quality Center is ranked 1st in Test Management Tools with 197 reviews while Visual Studio Test Professional is ranked 5th in Test Management Tools with 48 reviews. OpenText ALM / Quality Center is rated 8.0, while Visual Studio Test Professional is rated 8.6. 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 Visual Studio Test Professional writes "Customization is a key feature as is the ability to integrate with third-party services ". OpenText ALM / Quality Center is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, OpenText ALM Octane, Jira, Tricentis qTest and Zephyr Enterprise, whereas Visual Studio Test Professional is most compared with TFS, Apache JMeter, Tricentis NeoLoad, SmartBear TestComplete and Tricentis Tosca. See our OpenText ALM / Quality Center vs. Visual Studio Test Professional report.
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.