We performed a comparison between PTC Integrity 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."PTC Integrity has good stability."
"The solution is flexible in terms of customization. You can bend and reformat it in many ways. You can also customize the APIs and public functions."
"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."
"We found the requirement management and the version control features to be the most useful for our client."
"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 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."
"Complete traceability as per process requirements."
"It's is a very stable solution."
"TFS’s test management capability without the expensive licensing has large gaps. Users will be unable to access performance testing and coded UI testing capabilities."
"The most valuable features are the dashboard and task-selection capability."
"TFS' most valuable feature is the triage process. It is a robust solution that is easy to use."
"The API for managing TFS programmatically is very powerful, you can listen on work items changes by TFS events."
"The most valuable feature is integration, particularly if you have a .NET application."
"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."
"The solution's iteration board is good because you can track all your work with it."
"There are not enough reports. People would like to see something similar to what is available in JIRA."
"It's not so customizable. Compared to other tools, defining user stories is a slightly more cumbersome process as an ALM engineer."
"We are unhappy because everything that we needed required customization and this is not a plug-and-play type of solution at all."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"Not all of the functionality, which is exposed by the command line interface (tf.exe) is available in the Visual Studio GUI."
"Since it is Microsoft, it is technology agnostic, thus it does not really fit into various different technologies in the organization."
"Integration from Visual Studio could be improved."
"We are also using Microsoft Teams. The two products function separately. There is not enough collaboration between Microsoft Teams and TFS."
"It has been really dated. When you start to work more in an agile environment, it is not really that flexible. They tried to replicate the look and feel of Jira, but it is not quite there. It was nice to use in the past, but it is not as flexible now with the changing development environments and methodologies."
"The test management interface is not very handy."
"I would also like a true command prompt like Git."
"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."
PTC Integrity is ranked 12th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 12 reviews while TFS is ranked 3rd in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 93 reviews. PTC Integrity is rated 7.4, while TFS is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of PTC Integrity writes "Helps to create tasks, change requests and documentation". 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". PTC Integrity is most compared with Codebeamer, Polarion ALM, Jira, Microsoft Azure DevOps and Rally Software, whereas TFS is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, Jira, Rally Software and Visual Studio Test Professional. See our PTC Integrity 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.