We performed a comparison between IBM Rational Performance Tester, OpenText ALM / Quality Center, and Visual Studio Test Professional based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText, IDERA, Microsoft and others in Test Management Tools."Technical support is very good. I'm very satisfied with the assistance we've received so far."
"It can support both web applications and mobile applications, and in certain cases, it can also support testing of desktop applications or software-based applications. You can write web applications, mobile applications, and software-based applications."
"Quality management, project management from a QA perspective - testing, defect management, how testing relates back to requirements."
"As a system administrator, HPE ALM can be flexibly configured so that it can accommodate a variety of defined project lifecycles and test methodologies."
"The product can scale."
"The ability to integrate this solution with other applications is helpful. If there is automation, it comes with improved quality and speed."
"It has a good response time."
"Cross project customization through template really helps to maintain standards with respect to fields, workflows throughout the available projects."
"With test execution, you have an option to create custom fields. It is also really user-friendly. With other tools, we only have restricted fields and we cannot customize or add new columns or fields that users can make use of while testing. ALM is very flexible for creating new fields. It is easy for users to understand the application."
"Most of the features that I like the best are more on the analytics side."
"The most valuable feature of Visual Studio Test Professional is its ease of use."
"The most valuable features of the solution are its ease of use and availability."
"It is a very common and strong product. A lot of support is available for this product."
"Its initial setup process is easy."
"The most valuable features of Visual Studio Test Professional are the IntelliSense and the ease of adding the NuGet packages."
"User-friendly ID and direct integration with GitHub are the most valuable."
"The user interface is very friendly."
"Visual Studio is the easiest to use."
"There are some features that Micro Focus LoadRunner provides, but they are not available in IBM Rational Performance Tester. They should include such features. It can also have more reports similar to what HP provides. It might also need some improvement in terms of the tools and support for other technology areas. Certain technologies are not supported by every tool. They need to support all sorts of technologies and platforms on which web applications and mobile applications are built. They need complete support for all sorts of technologies."
"The solution is not easily scalable. If you want to extend the solution, you need to purchase a different kind of license. You also have to work with the IBM team to assist in scaling."
"If they could improve their BPT business components that would be good"
"Only Internet Explorer is supported. That is a big problem. They don't support Chrome and Firefox and so on."
"ALM uses a waterfall approach. We have some hybrid approaches in the company and need a more agile approach."
"The BPT also known as Business Process Testing can sometimes be very time intensive and sometimes might not be very intuitive to someone who is not familiar with BPT."
"They should specify every protocol or process with labels or names."
"Requirements management could be improved as the use is very limited. E.g., they have always stated that, "You can monitor and create requirements," but it has its limitations. That's why companies will choose another requirements management solution and import data from that source system into Quality Center. Micro Focus has also invested in an adapter between Dimensions RM and ALM via Micro Focus Connect. However, I see room for improvements in this rather outdated tool. I feel what Micro Focus did is say, "Our strategy is not to improve these parts within the tool itself, but search for supported integrations within our own tool set." This has not been helpful."
"ALM only works on Internet Explorer. It doesn't work on any other browser. In my opinion, Internet Explorer is generally a bit slower. I would like to see it work on Chrome or on other browsers."
"The UFT tests don't work very well and it seems to depend on things as simple as the screen resolution on a machine that I've moved to."
"It could be available for multiple platforms and other operating systems like Mac with a native port."
"Its UI could be better."
"Enhancing the support for web application testing and load performance would be an improvement."
"The performance could be faster."
"Visual Studio Test Professional needs to improve its stability."
"The product must provide more integration."
"It would be great to support other languages and applications, and that is one of the things we can improve."
"The price is reasonable, but it's not the best."
More IBM Rational Performance Tester Pricing and Cost Advice →
More OpenText ALM / Quality Center Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Visual Studio Test Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
