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 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 TFS is the central repository, and you can see what changes other developers did from which branch."
"I feel that the test plan and test tools are more manageable in TFS."
"The most valuable feature of TFS is integration."
"TFS's best features include user-friendly test management, bug reporting, and ID assignment."
"It's user friendly. We haven't had any issues so far. It's flexible. If we need something, we can always contact the owner in our headquarters to make a configuration."
"Stability is okay."
"The solution's iteration board is good because you can track all your work with it."
"The solution is very much stable."
"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."
"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."
"We encounter issues with backups."
"There should be management of the project built-in."
"As an end-user, I expect the solution's performance to be faster while staying as stable as possible."
"They should have design patterns in TFS for the development team, and design patterns for the QA."
"In the next release, I would like them to include integration for various projects, similar to what JIRA has, and they could create this feature on the dashboard."
"The user interface could improve and test management was not useful in TFS."
"TFS isn't a great tool if you're on the cloud."
"The interface can be improved and made more user-friendly."
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 27 reviews. OpenText AccuRev is rated 8.6, while TFS is rated 8.0. 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.