I have used HP Quality Center (QC) for over 3 years in industrial setup. QC is an versatile Quality management tool that offers test case and defect management capabilities along with a customizable reporting process. It also integrates with other defect and requirement tracking tools making it a good fit in multi-team environments as well as integrated application environment. QC does have an involved initial setup but once done, it is fairly easy to use by
testing and defect management teams. However, as QC comes with a high license
and maintenance cost, it is more suitable for large projects in terms of cost.
1> Intuitive GUI: Fairly easy to use and follow. For using QC, deep knowledge of the tool is not required.
2> For each test case, a test script with detailed steps can be created. This makes it easier to run the test script.
3> Provides interface with other test management systems like JIRA.
4> Excellent reporting process including customizable reports and charts. This is very useful for monitoring the progress of QA cycles and communicating the same to the higher management.
5> It stores test cases, test scripts and requirements in a modular fashion which can be easily copied and modified to create new test cases.
6> An extremely useful feature of QC is that it allows linking defects with higher level artifacts e.g., a defect can be associated both with failed test script and the unmet high level requirement. It allows traceability of a defect with varying granularity of information.
7> No extra form required to perform searches on defect list. Search is available for each field right on top of the list.
1> High licensing cost.
2> QC lacks a "watch" feature thus disallowing independent actors such as managers / leads to track progress of issues. For example, for each defect only the assigner and the assigned receive any updates / notifications. Everybody
else has to employ external means e.g., e-mail to get these updates /
notifications thus introducing humans in the loop.