We performed a comparison between Rally Software and TFS based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It documents stories in a way where we do not have to be heavy on front-end requirements, front-end documentation, and front-end workflows."
"Reporting is much easier and faster than Micro Focus ALM, with CA AC built on web services... Also, the data is more granular when it comes to tasks, iterations, sprints, and releases."
"Helps me plan an estimate of how soon or how far out we'll be able to deliver something."
"It helps me evaluate teams' historical performance using velocity charts."
"It is very stable. It has been on the market a long time."
"It helps with getting the alignment between strategy and execution for the product teams, all the way down to the delivery teams."
"It's designed around Agile, so it has all of the pieces that match up with the process."
"The reporting, and being able to roll that up across the verticals, was an important selling point for us."
"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."
"The solution is very much stable."
"The most valuable features of TFS are bug reporting and its high performance."
"For what I need TFS for, I have never run into any limitation."
"The work item feature is most valuable. It allows us to store all product requirements. We can also link the test cases to those requirements so that we know which feature has already been tested, and which one is waiting for testing. We can also couple the code reviews, unit tests, and automated tests into these requirements. It is reliable. It has all the features and good performance. It also has reporting tools or analysis tools."
"This solution enables us to link all items usefully, in the way we use Agile."
"Version Control: TFS offers both the centralized “TFVC” version control technology as well as the distributed “Git” version control technology."
"The most valuable features are test case writing and bug tracking."
"The product needs to have more integration capabilities."
"It could improve by being self-organizing: user stories, different hierarchies, and different perspectives. Not just as a single hierarchical structure, but something that can be multidimensional."
"The stronger CA can get on dependency mapping the better. That's the biggest hiccup. As you're setting up your features, they should make it easier to flag the dependencies, either across features or across projects. Then you're more set up for success."
"We'd like better dashboards to make visibility better."
"In terms of improvement, perhaps some more metrics. If they could add some additional, that would be cool."
"I would like for workspace admins to be able to hide projects in the Project Picker and not lose any historical data; make them invisible to certain users, visible to certain users, depending on permission sets. That would be lovely."
"There's a lot of support for Scrum and Agile, but it needs something for the Kanban side."
"In Rally Software, the connection with GitLab and GitHub needs improvement."
"The manageability and performance of the product are areas of concern where improvements are required."
"They should have design patterns in TFS for the development team, and design patterns for the QA."
"I understand Microsoft is phasing out TFS in favor of Git, so I would steer anyone interested in TFS to look into Git."
"I only use 1% of the functionality, so I am not familiar enough to know what needs to be improved."
"Since it is Microsoft, it is technology agnostic, thus it does not really fit into various different technologies in the organization."
"Currently, we are looking for a solution with which we can incorporate third-party development sites or third-party project teams into the system. Because it is on-premise, it is a bit problematic because we need to have a VPN or something else in the system. A cloud-based solution would be better for us, and that's what we are looking for. Our biggest problem is the external connection, which, of course, is limited by our own IT. It would be good to have some kind of publishing service for this external connection. It might be there, and it might be that our IT is making it impossible for us. Its template editor could be easier to use. Currently, customizing the project templates according to your needs requires some work."
"The project management side should be addressed and the project and release planning should be somewhat extended."
"The user interface could be improved to make it simpler and increase usability."
Rally Software is ranked 8th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 116 reviews while TFS is ranked 3rd in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 93 reviews. Rally Software is rated 8.2, while TFS is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Rally Software writes "A solution that enables users to accurately estimate the time required for building large software projects". 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". Rally Software is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, Jira, Jira Align, OpenText ALM / Quality Center and Digital.ai Agility, whereas TFS is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, Jira, Visual Studio Test Professional, OpenText ALM / Quality Center and TestRail. See our Rally Software vs. TFS report.
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.