We performed a comparison between Jira and OpenText ALM / Quality Center 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."I have found the most valuable features of Jira to be ticketing, life cycle workflow, definition, and creation. Many of the features are useful."
"It is a good defect tracking tool. It has a lot of capabilities and functionalities. There are a lot of graphs and a lot of tracking. It can be sprint-driven if you want."
"In general, the GUI is nice."
"The timeline management is great."
"Jira is very useful for project management for internal projects."
"I feel the strongest feature of Jira is its workflow engine. It helps us automate our workflows within our organization. It's the one characteristic of Jira which I think can help any organization, be it in any domain."
"The solution provides users with clarity in terms of the scope of work in a given timeframe."
"Work management software that has the flexibility to be configured for any company. It's stable, scalable, and offers responsive support."
"Templates: Allows us to standardize fields, workflows throughout hundreds of HPE ALM projects."
"You can plan ahead with all the requirements and the test lab set it up as a library, then go do multiple testing times, recording the default that's in the system."
"Within Quality Center, you have the dashboard where you can monitor your progress over different entities. You can build your own SQL query segments, and all that data is there in the system, then you can make a dashboard report."
"It is stable and reliable."
"Business process management is the most valuable feature of the solution."
"ALM is a well-known product and is one of the pioneers in providing test management facilities with a 360 degree view of requirements."
"Reporting was the main thing because, at my level, I was looking for a picture of exactly what the coverage was, which areas were tested, and where the gaps were. The reporting also allowed me to see test planning and test cases across the landscape."
"Test Execution (Test Lab): This allows us to track our manual tests with date and time and enter actual results and screenshots."
"They are not supporting in-house servers anymore and I think I've got until January to port this to something else."
"Jira could be more, for example, like Micro Focus, which is what I mostly work with currently."
"Its ability to perform true executive-level status reporting could be improved. There are a lot of benefits there, but there are also a lot of things they can and should expand upon."
"There could be some improvements in the project management and portfolio level features."
"It would be very useful to have drag and drop time tracking."
"There should be a way to integrate the mobile application or in some way, make it more clear because at first instance, I didn't understand how to use it."
"Once the solution is deployed, it's not easy to configure."
"The solution can improve by including test management functionality in a native bundle without plugins."
"We are looking for more automation capabilities."
"They should specify every protocol or process with labels or names."
"Defect ageing reports need to be included as built-in."
"Micro Focus is an expensive tool."
"We operate in Sweden, and there are not so many Swedish people that know the product."
"The session timeout time needs to be longer in my opinion."
"The version of Micro Focus ALM that we use only works through Internet Explorer (IE). We have to communicate to everyone that they can only use IE with the solution. This is a big limitation. We should be free to use any type of browser or operating system. We have customers and partners who are unable to log into the system and enter their defects because they work on a different operating system."
"Only Internet Explorer is supported. That is a big problem. They don't support Chrome and Firefox and so on."
More OpenText ALM / Quality Center Pricing and Cost Advice →
Jira is ranked 2nd in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 17 reviews while OpenText ALM / Quality Center is ranked 6th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 17 reviews. Jira is rated 8.0, while OpenText ALM / Quality Center is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Jira writes "Stable with good documentation and needs very little maintenance". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText ALM / Quality Center writes "It is a stable solution, and customer service is its most valuable feature". Jira is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, IBM Rational DOORS, OpenText ALM Octane, Polarion ALM and Digital.ai Agility, whereas OpenText ALM / Quality Center is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, OpenText ALM Octane, Tricentis qTest, Zephyr Enterprise and Tricentis Tosca. See our Jira vs. OpenText ALM / Quality Center 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.
Micro Focus ALM is a complete Test Management tool that can cover Requirements management, Defects management, Test Plan, Test Execution Suites as well as automation test executions with MF UFT (former HP QC). If you have a testing heavy project then MF ALM covers all the testing expectations well.
However, in an integrated environment with development, releases, and testing, JIRA can offer a better experience for JIRA issues (for requirements and incidents/defects), add-on for testing from JIRA marketplace (e.g. X-Ray) and offers a better fitment for DevOps. Developers and testers can work with the same tool for defects. requirements i.e. JIRA and manage testing with JIRA add-ons for Test Management.
I don't know enough about Micro Focus ALM but based from what I have seen it does provide a lot more than JIRA. I have worked with Azure DevOps and know that it can also provide more than JIRA. AZURE DevOps seems to be similar in comparison with Micro Focus ALM. So I would say if it was between JIRA and Micro Focus, then I will choose the latter.