We performed a comparison between IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation and Polarion Requirements based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Requirements Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."One of the most valuable features is how you can tailor the modules."
"The most valuable features are the versioning of requirements and the possibility to reuse them."
"The tool's most valuable feature is displaying requirements in a tabular format. This means you can see everything laid out in columns and rows. It is more aesthetic compared to other tools. The traceability matrix helps to view things better. It comes with different linking rules."
"The most valuable features are the baselines and links."
"The "Link by Attribute" feature is useful for making links without needing to use the web interface manually."
"IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation is easier to expand to build a backend with several servers, so you can also use it to scale up to several hundreds of users without major problems."
"It's web-based, so you don't have anything to install."
"There are many good features with DOORS. The solution has a concept of streams and baselines, as well as a concept of components. A component is a subproject inside a project."
"The biggest improvement would be in the transparency we have now. We have very complex products. We make whole systems with difficult and diverse areas such as hardware, software, mechanical and printing, etc. To get the overview of all the requirements into a system, at that sizing, is the main advantage we have in the organization now."
"We can easily customize it because of the web services and open APIs. Also, the APIs are available. We integrated Polarion with one of Siemens' products, Teamcenter, which is especially useful for automotive industries. There is an open API for integration with Jira as well, so for me, customization is a strong point."
"My company mainly utilizes the product for documenting internal standards, guidelines, and requirements. Currently, we're focusing on using it for internal purposes, but the vision is to expand its usage to include contract requirements and tracking functionalities. While we're not there yet, it has proven effective for managing our internal documentation needs."
"In my opinion, Polarion Requirements' most beneficial feature is the ability to manage specifications within a work-like document that functions as a work item. Its collaboration features have worked very well and have been very useful. We can easily exchange information with the testing team, the business, and with DevOps."
"We worked with the web interface."
"The solution is especially great for organizing folders effectively."
"Its flexibility and APIs are the most valuable."
"It is easier to produce documents using the platform."
"When you are in Jira or Confluence, you have some freedom in how you type in text. That's also a weakness of Confluence, however, as it opens the doors to sloppy work. In DOS Next Generation, the text is very rigorous, but it might be difficult for people who don't have the discipline. Having a way to quickly enter requirements could help. It might already be in there, but I don't know. I don't have enough experience with the tool yet."
"As a web tool, DNG can be difficult to use if the server is loaded or your network connection to it is saturated."
"I have come to the conclusion that if you are considering migrating from DOORS to DNG, don't! Instead of spending 100's to 1000's of hours doing migrations, invest those hours in a DXL programmer to make DOORS do what it isn't doing for you now."
"IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation has room for improvement compared to other tools like Polaris and Jama Connect. These tools offer more flexibility and options for developers, which IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation lacks. For example, you can define your link rules in Jama Connect, but you can't do that in IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation."
"It does have a tendency to condense the requirements. It kind of puts them in a tree format. Sometimes those trees are a little difficult."
"IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation is not a very user-friendly product."
"There is room for improvement in the APIs that they have exposed for integration."
"When you are not working on it every day it is not very intuitive."
"Polarion Requirement needs to have a feature where we can track changes and compare documents. Currently, we do it manually."
"Integration can be a little tricky if you're not aware of basic computer science or programming language."
"The one thing I would mention is the license policy is a little bit difficult. For different roles, you will need different license models. That seems a little bit difficult for us. Especially when you introduce such a complex system, you want to know the right way is to do licensing. It's not clear what that best way would be. The solution will be here for a long time, and I just think it could be more clear."
"In my opinion, the main area for improvement in Polarion Requirements is its user interface. It should be easier for engineers to understand how it works, as many features are not very easily understandable for end-users."
"We encountered numerous challenges, such as issues with requirements, project management, timing, and planning. The main problem with Polarion at the outset, I believe, was our limited understanding of the planning phase. During that time, we were more focused on change management related to requirements. Recognizing the importance of planning has been a key realization for us. Another mistake we made was not comprehending the need to document these requirements to manage all the work items effectively. Now, we understand the significance of this documentation. As a result of these insights, we have started to see a growing number of competitors from Polarion in this field. One potential improvement could be enabling Polarion to export work items not just to Microsoft Office but also to other office tools."
"If we have more than one thousand work items in one live-book then it becomes almost unusable."
"The usability of the solution should also be improved."
"One thing to consider is increased flexibility in terms of workflow configuration."
More IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation is ranked 4th in Application Requirements Management with 12 reviews while Polarion Requirements is ranked 3rd in Application Requirements Management with 13 reviews. IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation is rated 7.8, while Polarion Requirements is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation writes "An industry-leading tool to demonstrate traceability between requirements, with valuable features for tailoring modules and managing several thousand requirements". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Polarion Requirements writes "Defines, builds, tests and manages complex software systems". IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation is most compared with IBM Rational DOORS, Jama Connect, Jira, Helix ALM and PTC Integrity Requirements Connector, whereas Polarion Requirements is most compared with IBM Rational DOORS, Jama Connect, Jira and Helix ALM. See our IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation vs. Polarion Requirements report.
See our list of best Application Requirements Management vendors.
We monitor all Application Requirements Management 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.
