We performed a comparison between OpenText AccuRev and TFS based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Atlassian, Microsoft, Nutanix and others in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites."The most valuable feature is the Business Process Testing feature, BPT, because it brings in the most revenue."
"The product has all the features that we for application managementat a lower cost."
"The solution is 100% scalable. It's much more scalable than the customer's capacity for implementing it. We do plan to increase usage ourselves."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is taking snapshots while doing the execution of the test cases."
"The interface is good with TFS."
"The most valuable feature of TFS is that it keeps the code secure while working collaboratively in a team of four or five individuals."
"It is a stable solution."
"Since it is a robust solution, I face no performance issues. Also, considering how well the implementation process of the solution was carried out, we never faced any issues while using the solution."
"It is very user-friendly."
"The most valuable feature is integration, particularly if you have a .NET application."
"The initial setup is fairly easy."
"It's is a very stable solution."
"What I'm missing from the solution is a repository for the code. Something like Git, for example. Some sort of depository for the code that is embedded."
"The pricing should be more competitive."
"In the next release, I would like to have a repository for the code which is embedded. Apart from that, it has everything I need."
"It is difficult to gain experience with the product because resources and documentation for learning are not available."
"Access and permissions are confusing when attempting to include basic manual testing functionalities."
"We encounter issues with backups."
"The dashboard needs more enhancements."
"The user interface could improve and test management was not useful in TFS."
"TFS and MTM have their own style of working and they are different from other tools like Jira or TestRail, which are simpler and easy to use."
"Not all of the functionality, which is exposed by the command line interface (tf.exe) is available in the Visual Studio GUI."
"TFS is scalable with different Microsoft tools for test management but it is not scalable with other third-party tools."
"The test management interface is not very handy."
Earn 20 points
OpenText AccuRev is ranked 23rd in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites while TFS is ranked 3rd in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 93 reviews. OpenText AccuRev is rated 8.6, while TFS is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of OpenText AccuRev writes "Good packaging features, but reporting is limited". On the other hand, the top reviewer of TFS writes "It is helpful for scheduled releases and enforcing rules, but it should be better at merging changes for multiple developers and retaining the historical information". OpenText AccuRev is most compared with Jama Connect, whereas TFS is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, Jira, Rally Software, Visual Studio Test Professional and OpenText ALM / Quality Center.
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.