We performed a comparison between IBM Rational ALM and PTC Integrity 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."The most valuable feature is the reporting of the CPU usage on the dashboard."
"The word emulation and importing is good."
"It helped us contain critical things, like source code and several documents, which is very important to us."
"You can customize the board according to your needs."
"The cataloging is a very valuable feature. For a lot of enterprises, they end up not knowing which applications do specific features. The cataloging helps with this. It's not that verbose, but it still gives you allowances to put in more detail."
"It's easy to use."
"The tools for requirement capture we have found very useful."
"I would rate the stability of this product a nine out of ten."
"PTC Integrity has good stability."
"We have been using it because it gives certain abilities in the automotive industry, such as auditing or keeping track of information."
"The tool is quite structured and has a good command set."
"I personally like PTC Integrity because it provides everything within the software. You can store and access your data and perform various tasks. Compared to other products, I find it user-friendly, which can sometimes feel complex. I think PTC Integrity is user-friendly, making it nice to use. The tool is easier to learn."
"The most valuable feature is traceability starting from the requirements until the end of a project."
"It's a good tool to manage software versions, update the status, and manage tasks."
"I have found that previously, the OEM sector was managing everything, possibly manually. However, with the introduction of the product, it has become much easier for customers to handle their products. Previously, customers were using different software to manage their products. However, PTC Integrity offers a solution for requirements management, test management, and even development to support live ticket management. So instead of using multiple software tools, we can use it for all these purposes."
"Complete traceability as per process requirements."
"I would like to see better reporting features. The out-of-box reporting is - I don't want to say limited - but the focus is on the Scrum and Sprint reports. We need more reporting features regarding the history of the work, tracking it more deeply."
"Some improvements to the user interface (UI) would be helpful, such as exposing more services to make it easier to customize to the needs of each customer."
"In the next release, we expect a traceability metrics configuration where we can configure the user stories. We also expect them to improve or simplify the query process."
"The solution can improve in the development area and the customized applications."
"The interconnectivity between packages is a major support problem and can be improved."
"Of course it would be related to customer experience. The solution is not user friendly at all. It needs an expert to use it, although the reporting feature was okay."
"I think nowadays people are getting into Jira and other tools. What is happening is, this solution is becoming more traditional, whereas Jira and other tools are more attractive for the new users to learn and start using because of the graphical interfaces."
"The features should be more intuitive. If I'm looking for something, its location should be easy to locate."
"It's not easy to plan on this solution and it's not user-friendly. The interface should be more like a web interface. It's not easy to use."
"I would like to see better integration from the architectural side."
"The tool's web-based UI needs improvement. Some functionalities don't work yet, and querying items is slow. Also, it's not in the cloud yet. I don't know if they'll do it in the future because they already have core agreements with customers. If they offer these functionalities, customers will likely buy their product."
"For complex businesses, the internal templates could have more flexibility and compatibility."
"The web version does not have all the functionalities of the non-web version. Administration and adding/removing fields, etc. cannot be done on the web version. People want solutions that are compatible with Android. I also want to have a version by which I can bulk edit all the fields."
"To be honest, the third controller system is kind of old. There are lots of transactional changes that have not been implemented in PTC. If you have a larger project, for example, whenever you give bits and need to change 10,000 files you can just commit them. But here the work style is a little more file based, so you'll have to take care of almost all the files individually. It's not a single commit like you do here, but rather you have to allocate time for each component or file that you want to check in or commit. That's a very big issue."
"It's not so customizable. Compared to other tools, defining user stories is a slightly more cumbersome process as an ALM engineer."
"There are not enough reports. People would like to see something similar to what is available in JIRA."
IBM Rational ALM is ranked 10th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 17 reviews while PTC Integrity is ranked 12th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 12 reviews. IBM Rational ALM is rated 7.2, while PTC Integrity is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of IBM Rational ALM writes "A complex deployment that is not stable, but is cloud-based". On the other hand, the top reviewer of PTC Integrity writes "Helps to create tasks, change requests and documentation". IBM Rational ALM is most compared with Jira, Codebeamer, Microsoft Azure DevOps, Polarion ALM and Atlassian ALM, whereas PTC Integrity is most compared with Codebeamer, Polarion ALM, Jira, Microsoft Azure DevOps and Jama Connect. See our IBM Rational ALM vs. PTC Integrity 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.
