We performed a comparison between OpenText ALM / Quality Center and Oracle Application Testing Suite based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Atlassian, Microsoft, Nutanix and others in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites."The most valuable Quality Center feature, I find, is the solution's integration with some of our automation tools. For us, the ability to capture and record and the ease of use from a user perspective, are all key."
"The independent view of elevated access is good."
"This solution is open and very easy to integrate. The interface is good too."
"It's basically the way to show the work that we do as QA testers, and to have a historical view of those executions."
"The most valuable feature is the ST Add-In. It's a Microsoft add-in that makes it much easier to upload test cases into Quality Center."
"Cross project customization through template really helps to maintain standards with respect to fields, workflows throughout the available projects."
"The initial setup is straightforward. It's not too hard to deploy."
"Produces good reports and has a great traceability feature."
"We find the front-end interface of this solution to be very user-friendly, meaning easy navigation even for novice users."
"The graphics are very intuitive and it's very easy to get scale of development."
"User friendly UI / Tree view to work with adding steps."
"The most valuable features are functional testing and the central repository that contains various scripts."
"We like that we don't need a separate management tool. This is a good feature. It also has an inbuilt performance tool which is on Flash. It has very good record and playback feature as well. The inspection tool is also very good. Overall, since it comes with all the three packages, it's very good."
"Has good automation and load-testing capabilities."
"We do not need a separate test management tool because we have there is a management tool. That is a very good feature. Secondly, it has an inbuilt performance testing tool, which is on flash. It has very good record and playback features as well. And apart from that, there is a good inspection feature. Since it comes with all of the packages, it's very good."
"The function test feature is valuable."
"Quality Center's UI is outdated, and it's a little bit slow on the login part and different parts of the application. That's why we're switching solutions. I believe most companies are switching to Octane or something else. Micro Focus should enhance the interface and reports."
"ALM Quality Center could be improved with more techniques to manage Agile processes."
"The UI is very dated. Most applications these days have a light UI that can be accessed by pretty much any browser; QC still uses a UI which has a look almost the same for the past 20 years."
"We cannot rearrange the Grid in the Test Lab. It is in alphabetical order right now. But sometimes a user will want to see, for example, the X column next to the B column. If they came out with that it would be useful for us. They are working on that, as we have raised that request with Micro Focus."
"Micro Focus ALM Quality Center should improve the reports. Reporting on tax execution progress against the plan. However, they might have improved over two years since I have used the solution."
"It is pricey."
"The solution needs to offer support for Agile. Currently, ALM only supports Waterfall."
"Lacks sufficient plug-ins."
"If there's a feature we want in OATS that's missing and we report that to Oracle, it takes a long time."
"The dashboards need to be simplified and made more user-friendly."
"The pathfinding at times is slow when we are using it. The tool's performance can be improved."
"To provide test automation support for other products like SAP, Windows and Java Applications when it comes to Functional Test Automation testing."
"I have faced issues with some indexing items."
"Oracle Application Testing Suite does encounter some lag. When I am trying to record something, the tool gets stuck."
"We would like to see the instruction documentation made into video or audio formats, to help new users get used to the modules."
"Lacks patches for new OS systems and doesn't work on a Mac."
More OpenText ALM / Quality Center Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Oracle Application Testing Suite Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText ALM / Quality Center is ranked 5th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 197 reviews while Oracle Application Testing Suite is ranked 9th in Performance Testing Tools with 24 reviews. OpenText ALM / Quality Center is rated 8.0, while Oracle Application Testing Suite is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of OpenText ALM / Quality Center writes "Offers features for higher-end traceability and integration with different tools but lacks in scalability ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Oracle Application Testing Suite writes "Requires little maintenance, is stable, and easy to deploy". OpenText ALM / Quality Center is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, OpenText ALM Octane, Jira, Tricentis qTest and Zephyr Enterprise, whereas Oracle Application Testing Suite is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText UFT One, Apache JMeter, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud and Katalon Studio.
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.