We performed a comparison between OpenText AccuRev and TFS based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Atlassian, 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 most valuable feature of the solution is taking snapshots while doing the execution of the test cases."
"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."
"I have found almost all of the features valuable because it integrates well with your Microsoft products. If a client is using the entire Microsoft platform, then TFS would be definitely preferable. It integrates with the digital studio development environment as well."
"I like the Kanban board. It is very useful in terms of seeing who is working on what and what the current status of work is."
"As far as queries are concerned, creating, grading, or customizing the queries as a primary requirement is very easy to do."
"Some of the valuable features are version control and the ability to create different collections in terms of segregating the authorization for teams who connect to small projects."
"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."
"I like its MTM (Microsoft Test Manager) section which gives us options to create various test plans and add test cases into it."
"The initial setup is fairly easy."
"The traceability is valuable. While managing the workflows, it was always nice to have that traceability from requirements and all the way through design. It integrates with Microsoft Test Manager, and you can have everything that is related to a requirement attached to it."
"It is difficult to gain experience with the product because resources and documentation for learning are not available."
"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."
"Microsoft should discontinue the use of SharePoint as I don’t really see any value add to TFS, document management features can be included in TFS web portal itself, if required!"
"Integration from Visual Studio could be improved."
"The price could be cheaper."
"As an end-user, I expect the solution's performance to be faster while staying as stable as possible."
"I'm looking for specific options that aren't currently available, such as active status, new status, or what's currently in progress."
"I'd like to see some kind of visualization tool for TFS that would make life much easier."
"Sometimes we feel that it need more CPU, and RAMs on TFS server, either we implemented the hardware with the product minimum requirements."
"Since the TFS was an on-prem solution, the private network accessibility was restricted."
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.