We performed a comparison between Codebeamer 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."Since implementing this solution we have better communication and information exchange with customers."
"CodeBeamer provides full traceability, excellent collaboration, regulatory compliance, and instant reporting with its holistic approach from requirement management to testing."
"It is a stable solution."
"The solution easily replaces IBM DOORS, which no longer offers maintenance in China."
"The platform provided the flexibility to expand our business processes, accommodating or altering them to suit the requirements of a changing environment."
"One of the most valuable features of Codebeamer is its strong performance."
"The traceability is so simple that I don't need to do any additional configurations related to traceability."
"You can track the metrics in the Agile dashboard very easily."
"The most valuable feature is simplicity."
"The work item feature is most valuable. It allows us to store all product requirements. We can also link the test cases to those requirements so that we know which feature has already been tested, and which one is waiting for testing. We can also couple the code reviews, unit tests, and automated tests into these requirements. It is reliable. It has all the features and good performance. It also has reporting tools or analysis tools."
"For what I need TFS for, I have never run into any limitation."
"The traceability is valuable. While managing the workflows, it was always nice to have that traceability from requirements and all the way through design. It integrates with Microsoft Test Manager, and you can have everything that is related to a requirement attached to it."
"The most valuable feature from my point of view is project management, which includes user stories as well as task management."
"Some of the valuable features are version control and the ability to create different collections in terms of segregating the authorization for teams who connect to small projects."
"It is a stable solution."
"This solution enables us to link all items usefully, in the way we use Agile."
"We would like to see more industry-specific features that are tailored to the vertical markets."
"The search and replace feature within the tool itself could be improved."
"Usability needs to be improved."
"The product's UI is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"I would like to see more, easily trackable reports."
"Certain areas in Codebeamer could be improved, like addressing small issues, glitches, or bugs."
"It would be helpful if Codebeamer's overall processing and integration with software like Jira could be improved."
"The solution has a very small market share in China. It's almost like a startup."
"I would like to see TFS improve its web interface as there are some limitations with IDs and the integration behind it and with open-source tools like VS Code."
"More options could be provided from the perspective of requirements management, which would help product owners to use the tool effectively."
"They have room for improvement in merging the source code changes for multiple developers across files. It is very good at highlighting the changes that the source code automatically does not know how to handle, but it's not very good at reporting the ones that it did automatically. There are times when we have source code that gets merged, and we lose the changes that we expected to happen. It can get a little confusing at times. They can just do a little bit better on the merging of changes for multiple developers."
"The user interface could improve and test management was not useful in TFS."
"Not all of the functionality, which is exposed by the command line interface (tf.exe) is available in the Visual Studio GUI."
"They should have design patterns in TFS for the development team, and design patterns for the QA."
"Access and permissions are confusing when attempting to include basic manual testing functionalities."
"Integration from Visual Studio could be improved."
Codebeamer is ranked 9th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 10 reviews while TFS is ranked 3rd in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 93 reviews. Codebeamer is rated 7.8, while TFS is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Codebeamer writes "Has good technical support services, but the migration process needs improvement". 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". Codebeamer is most compared with PTC Integrity, Polarion ALM, Microsoft Azure DevOps, Jira and OpenText ALM Octane, whereas TFS is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, Jira, Rally Software, TestRail and Polarion ALM. See our Codebeamer 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.