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."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 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."
"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."
"It's a good tool to manage software versions, update the status, and manage tasks."
"Complete traceability as per process requirements."
"We have been using it because it gives certain abilities in the automotive industry, such as auditing or keeping track of information."
"PTC Integrity has good stability."
"Team Foundation Server (TFS) is easy to use, and we have a complete trail and traceability. We also like the access control part."
"Microsoft's technical team is supportive."
"The API for managing TFS programmatically is very powerful, you can listen on work items changes by TFS events."
"The biggest value-add is the solution integrates well with most Microsoft products."
"The solution's iteration board is good because you can track all your work with it."
"Work item management integration with source control."
"TFS is very user-friendly."
"User alerts are very helpful for knowing when work is required."
"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."
"There are not enough reports. People would like to see something similar to what is available in JIRA."
"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 so customizable. Compared to other tools, defining user stories is a slightly more cumbersome process as an ALM engineer."
"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."
"I would like to see better integration from the architectural side."
"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."
"There's not automatic access to test case management and execution."
"Since it is Microsoft, it is technology agnostic, thus it does not really fit into various different technologies in the organization."
"I understand Microsoft is phasing out TFS in favor of Git, so I would steer anyone interested in TFS to look into Git."
"This solution is quite old and it is already being bundled as Azure DevOps Server."
"I would also like a true command prompt like Git."
"Not all of the functionality, which is exposed by the command line interface (tf.exe) is available in the Visual Studio GUI."
"The user interface could improve and test management was not useful in TFS."
"Integration from Visual Studio could be improved."
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, Visual Studio Test Professional and Digital.ai Agility. 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.