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 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."
"The product has all the features that we for application managementat a lower cost."
"The most valuable feature is the Business Process Testing feature, BPT, because it brings in the most revenue."
"Version Control: TFS offers both the centralized “TFVC” version control technology as well as the distributed “Git” version control technology."
"It is a stable solution."
"The most valuable feature is the backlog."
"It is very user-friendly."
"It is a stable solution."
"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 feel that the test plan and test tools are more manageable in TFS."
"I like the build management features and the integration with Jenkins and many other tools."
"It is difficult to gain experience with the product because resources and documentation for learning are not available."
"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."
"The pricing should be more competitive."
"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."
"TFS should allow more integration with different platforms."
"As an end-user, I expect the solution's performance to be faster while staying as stable as possible."
"The price could be cheaper."
"We are also using Microsoft Teams. The two products function separately. There is not enough collaboration between Microsoft Teams and TFS."
"TFS is scalable with different Microsoft tools for test management but it is not scalable with other third-party tools."
"The solution should have better dashboards."
"The manageability and performance of the product are areas of concern where improvements are required."
"Sometimes we feel that it need more CPU, and RAMs on TFS server, either we implemented the hardware with the product minimum requirements."
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 , 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.