We performed a comparison between 3SL Cradle and IBM Rational DOORS 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."3SL Cradle's most valuable feature is its flexibility in managing all your needs immediately."
"The most valuable feature of IBM Rational DOORS is the full requirements development and testing."
"It has the features of: traceability, configuration management, and user access."
"It's a very interesting tool. I like that it's simple. You have to create your document, add your templates, and have your headings and definitions, and it's done. You must attribute the discipline and fill out the comment field for requirements. It also provides you with unique IDs for each requirement. I like that it never duplicates IDs."
"I like the user interface with regard to creating links between requirements and tracing links to requirements."
"I would say that the best feature of the solution is that since everything is in one place, and if you make any changes, then they are recorded or tracked."
"The solution is stable."
"The next-generation features are good."
"Rational DOORS' most valuable feature is that you can write any kind of requirement you want."
"3SL Cradle could be improved with better support for SysML functionalities."
"The web application DOORS Web Access doesn't have the same functionality as the standard client, so it's not a real substitute. For example, web Access only provides writing requirements, but you can't do much more with it."
"One of the things that many people complain about is it's hard to manage attributes. For example, tables or figures. This is something that can be improved."
"The performance could be improved. It doesn't run as smoothly as it could."
"They need to provide users with information on what options would be best for their setup."
"IBM should integrate some solutions they already own toenhance the utility of the product further. Specifically import and export to Office products is more difficult than it needs to be."
"The kind of dashboard is not very convenient."
"There needs to be quicker access to tech support. When I have a two minute question that takes two minutes to answer, it shouldn't take me 45 minutes and/or a few days of callbacks to get to the right technical support person. It's unnecessary and frustrating for the user."
"The customer must also have the tool to import the changes and accept them as a part of the review."
3SL Cradle is ranked 11th in Application Requirements Management with 3 reviews while IBM Rational DOORS is ranked 1st in Application Requirements Management with 51 reviews. 3SL Cradle is rated 8.0, while IBM Rational DOORS is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of 3SL Cradle writes "Flexible solution that manages all your needs". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Rational DOORS writes " Offers ability to automate tasks and to track changes within documents and compare different versions of requirements but modeling capabilities could benefit from a web-based tool ". 3SL Cradle is most compared with Jira, whereas IBM Rational DOORS is most compared with Polarion Requirements, Jira, Jama Connect, Helix ALM and OpenText Dimensions RM. See our 3SL Cradle vs. IBM Rational DOORS 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.