We performed a comparison between IBM Rational DOORS and Jama Connect 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."The most valuable feature of IBM Rational DOORS is the full requirements development and testing."
"I like being able to sort and categorize the requirements and the exporting functions."
"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."
"Starting to use the solution is pretty straightforward. There isn't too much of a learning curve."
"The most valuable feature for me is the ability to enter data into one table, or context, and link it across modules."
"Very customizable and can be as powerful as you want it to be."
"The solution is stable."
"It is a stable solution."
"Jama Connect is a good tool for the entire software development cycle."
"Provides suitable tools for managing regulatory requirements."
"Technical support answers fairly quickly compared to others like IBM or Atlassian. They also offer quite a good knowledge base for advanced cases and how to plan it, etc. via videos that they provide. They are quite useful."
"I like Jama Connect because it's easy to use and understand. The widgets are great, and linking is straightforward. The solution is not complex compared to its competitors."
"You can get full traceability with any other system. It also includes a test module, and you build the traceability matrix incrementally throughout the development process."
"The most valuable feature is the user-friendly interface."
"It is good at requirements management and test management."
"It could be more user-friendly. It's not a beautiful tool. The user interface is gray. It has only lists inside, and it's horrible when you want to add tables. It's tough to add tables and manage them. It also becomes difficult when you want to add images."
"Rational DOORS' most valuable feature is that you can write any kind of requirement you want."
"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."
"The images are not clear. We have to use them as OLE objects. And in the testing part, I'm not sure how to link it with it. This is my main concern."
"Complexity, performance, openness are the three areas that can be improved. The IBM architecture and specifically Jazz looks more complex. There are a lot of servers. It's quite complicated. The search capabilities lack in IBM Rational DOORS Classic for customers who have a database with a requirement of more than 25,000 records. For example, you can search easily for a module, but it's really difficult to look for keywords through the whole database because all the modules are separated into small components, which makes the search quite complex. This is something that's really annoying because when we want to make an impact analysis, we would like to analyze the product globally. It's quite difficult to manage. The fact that you can interact externally with data makes it complex. The approach is complex and doesn't work as expected. For example, when I tried to experiment with exporting some records, the tool crashed, but I couldn't find out the root cause, that is, whether it happened because of Rational Windows or lack of memory. It was just crashing. Logs weren't very clear. IBM can try to use more recent technology for different aspects and make it easy. They can also provide free integration from DOORS Classic to DOORS. Currently, all the customization in Excel is lost, which makes it very complex. It would be a feature to make new versions compatible with features in the past versions."
"There are problems with communicating between DOORS and Microsoft Office."
"It would be helpful if Microsoft provided a more user-friendly interface for updating and querying updates. Additionally, if there was a way for users to notify developers of any changes in requirements, it would allow for faster and more efficient updates to the solution's architecture. This could be in the form of a notification system that alerts developers of any changes that need to be made. Additionally, the solution is document-driven and it should be more digital."
"Both the performance and the price could be improved."
"I have inquired about pricing for this solution but have not yet heard anything, so their response time in this regard is something that should be improved."
"I think there's room for improvement, especially with the review process. Reviews should be integrated with requirement evaluation instead of being separate from it. The review should not run parallel to the requirement."
"The initial setup could be better, it's complicated."
"There are some security concerns with Jama Connect, including two-factor enablement."
"The user interface could be modernized and the product lacks project management functionalities."
"Test management can be improved. It's not so scalable. The user interface needs to split things into small projects."
"t is rather slow, so the speed of the process and consuming information should be improved. It doesn't have a nice way of viewing information. We would like to see better interfaces for consuming information."
"I believe one of the weak points is the reporting side. You must export inter-readable reports from Jama if you do not use the system as a repository for your design history file. Jama is great if you keep it in Jama, but reporting out requires some customization to get it right."
IBM Rational DOORS is ranked 1st in Application Requirements Management with 51 reviews while Jama Connect is ranked 5th in Application Requirements Management with 9 reviews. IBM Rational DOORS is rated 8.0, while Jama Connect is rated 7.4. 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 ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Jama Connect writes "Agile, well structured, and has a great review module, which makes the design reviews smooth". IBM Rational DOORS is most compared with Polarion Requirements, Jira, Helix ALM, IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation and PTC Integrity Requirements Connector, whereas Jama Connect is most compared with Polarion Requirements, Jira, IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation, Microsoft Azure DevOps and Polarion ALM. See our IBM Rational DOORS vs. Jama Connect 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.