We performed a comparison between Microsoft Azure DevOps and Rally Software 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 scalable."
"We use all the DevOps features and services, like reports, Boards, Pipelines, Artifactory, etc. The interface is interactive and intuitive. The platform visuals and workflow are straightforward in Azure DevOps."
"The most valuable feature is the ease of use and performance."
"I think the most usable thing is that you can follow the whole progress of the development process. This makes it very useful for us."
"The pricing seems to be reasonable."
"The features of Azure Repos that we find most impactful are those related to source control management within our DevOps code management processes."
"Azure Pipeline and Azure Release are most valuable. I use Azure DevOps through pipeline and release."
"The most valuable feature is that it's fully integrated, where we have a single place to do everything that we need."
"It's a good platform to keep track of all the user stories across all projects. So rather than having one off Excel spreadsheets with all of the requirements, it is a good place to have all of that."
"It helps me evaluate teams' historical performance using velocity charts."
"It has allowed the quality assurance team to keep all information in sync with the application requirements and user stories for our general development."
"The most useful part is how it breaks down tasks into parents and children, manageable tasks. It has a whole project as an initiative, and then it breaks it down further and further. And then you get to actual user stories and tasks that you can sit and develop."
"When we went into Scaled Agile Framework, we could not have done it without the use of Agile Central. It allows us to scale our Scrum teams, and it also enables us when we do our remote big room plannings."
"We use the roadmap features, and we're getting better at using dates to use the roadmap so that we can see if we're on target for work."
"Its ability to scale."
"The reporting, and being able to roll that up across the verticals, was an important selling point for us."
"Reporting across multiple projects could be improved."
"With an ecosystem that has been up and running for some time, you won't have the full-flexibility that you would have with a new ecosystem."
"Incorporating security tools directly into DevOps is crucial, as many existing DevOps solutions lack robust security features."
"Its UI can be easier and more customer-friendly. The UI can be improved from the project management and agile perspective."
"It is very difficult to integrate the product with third-party tools."
"The tool has a logical link between epic feature, user story, and task, but when you try to generate a report to show the delivery progress against a feature, it is not easy. To see the percentage completion for a feature or progress of any delivery, it is not easy to draw a report."
"Testing is very important. Microsoft Azure DevOps tests very well. However, DevOps teams need to be aware of what they are impacting when someone updates anything on the system."
"The testing environment and different pipelining concepts can be improved."
"It is hard to track the changes. For example, we're in sprint 25, and then we have 26, 27, 28, and 29. Throughout that whole time, we're developing pipelines in Azure, moving to GitHub, creating pipelines, and working with teams. But sometimes, we need to revisit specific decisions made in previous sprints, like pipeline details. Maybe it's in our Azure Wiki, GitHub, or Teams, but it's not always consistent. I wish I could search for all tasks or stories related to that particular effort without needing to know everyone's individual stories or features."
"A lot of the features that we would be looking to add, I am learning may not be within Agile Central, but part of another CA tool set."
"I'd like to be able to color code timeboxes, so I have an easy visual way to track the success of sprints."
"In Rally Software, the connection with GitLab and GitHub needs improvement."
"The Reporting feature can improve, especially around executive summaries and dependency mapping."
"In terms of improvement, perhaps some more metrics. If they could add some additional, that would be cool."
"It could improve by being self-organizing: user stories, different hierarchies, and different perspectives. Not just as a single hierarchical structure, but something that can be multidimensional."
"I would like to see more Kanban support. As it stands, it doesn't seem to have the features or the layouts that the teams really need to be able to execute their tasks. It almost tries to force you into more of a Scrum style."
Microsoft Azure DevOps is ranked 2nd in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 126 reviews while Rally Software is ranked 7th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 116 reviews. Microsoft Azure DevOps is rated 8.2, while Rally Software is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Microsoft Azure DevOps writes "Allows us to deploy code to production without releasing certain features immediately and agile project management capabilities offer resource-leveling". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Rally Software writes "A solution that enables users to accurately estimate the time required for building large software projects". Microsoft Azure DevOps is most compared with GitLab, Jira, TFS, ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management and OpenText ALM / Quality Center, whereas Rally Software is most compared with Jira, TFS, Jira Align, OpenText ALM / Quality Center and GitLab. See our Microsoft Azure DevOps vs. Rally Software report.
See our list of best Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites vendors and best Enterprise Agile Planning Tools 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.
