We performed a comparison between IBM Rational Quality Manager, OpenText ALM / Quality Center, and PractiTest based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText, Microsoft, IDERA and others in Test Management Tools."The one feature that has not allowed us to switch to any other solution is the integration with functional testing."
"Reusability and integration capabilities which make it a great choice for organizations that use a variety of development tools and platforms."
"It's very reliable as a solution."
"Latest features include versioning of testings which can be great when used for multiple releases of a product."
"Integration with the other professional tools is a very strong advantage, so that we can have a traceability between the requirements and defects in Rational Team Concert. That's the most important aspect."
"RQM's best features are integration with test automation and performance testing."
"The most valuable feature is the RFT because it allows us to automate manual test cases."
"RQM is something that we use everyday, so it has to be up and running, otherwise we would lose everything."
"The best thing is that you can see your current status in real time... To see real-time updates, you just log in to ALM and you can see exactly what the progress is. You can also see if the plan for the day is being executed properly, and it's all tracked. From the management side, I find those features very valuable."
"We are able to use Micro Focus ALM Quality Center for test management, defect management, test process, test governance activities, and requirement management. We are able to achieve all of this, the solution is very useful."
"The solution's support team was always there to help."
"Lab Management is a valuable feature, because you have a 360 view."
"I love to use this solution with single projects. It has helped our productivity. With the metrics that I receive, I can put them onto the management model so I can see them there. It has reduced our time for project management and controls by 20 percent."
"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."
"Reporting was the main thing because, at my level, I was looking for a picture of exactly what the coverage was, which areas were tested, and where the gaps were. The reporting also allowed me to see test planning and test cases across the landscape."
"Ability to customize modules, particularly Defect Tracking module on company specific needs"
"The most valuable feature is the way the libraries are structured so that they were not folder driven."
"While RQM allows for running tests and viewing results, it could be further enhanced in terms of performance and speed."
"Organizing the test cases is tedious. There is no mechanism to keep and maintain the test cases as hierarchy. This should be seriously addressed."
"I think it's fine from a performance perspective but usability is something that needs improvement."
"Adding support for uploading a collection of test cases would be a helpful addition."
"It would be helpful if we could assign a hierarchy to a group of test cases."
"Integration capabilities with other vendors' tools should improve."
"Mainly Quality Assurance and DevOps, but of course the whole company and management areas with more knowledge of quality and client success approach."
"Currently, the user interface needs to be more user-friendly."
"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."
"Quality Center's ability to connect all the different projects to reflect status and progress is quite complicated. We may develop something because there are so many projects. Right now, I have to do something which Quality Center is really not designed for: over reporting. This is a very big problem right now. We may develop some controls, but it is problem at the moment. I love Quality Center for individual projects to work with it. However, if you have a lot of projects for Quality Manager to do cross reporting on many projects, then it's almost impossible. It takes a lot of time."
"I would like to be able to search easier, not just do SQL queries, being able to do free keyword searches on the data. That's valuable."
"There's room for improvement in the requirements traceability with Micro Focus ALM Quality Center. That could use an uplift."
"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 needs Pure-FTPd WebUI and single sign-on."
"Only Internet Explorer is supported. That is a big problem. They don't support Chrome and Firefox and so on."
"The downside is that the Quality Center's only been available on Windows for years, but not on Mac."
"It doesn't allow you to connect to multiple different tracking tools."
More OpenText ALM / Quality Center Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points