Micro Focus ALM Quality Center Review
Reporting structure can be done using a self generated graph. This makes reports look professional even if the user is not completely clued up on ways to report.
- Ability to link a test case to a defect which increases traceability
- Ability to log a defect and link similar defects to that one defect. Great for not logging repetitive defects
- The content of the test case parameters (Actual, Expected Results etc) are pulled on the defect which nullifies retyping
- Ability to manage more than one project site at a go
- Reporting structure can be done using a self generated graph. Makes reports look professional even if the user is not completely clued up on ways to report.
Improvements to My Organization:
- When I started testing we used to test from SharePoint. This was good for the time being but it lacked a lot in terms of design and the priority of defects was not up to standard. There was no sight of show-stoppers and nobody would know of them unless it is communicated with the relevant people. As opposed to Quality Center where it is highlighted in a form of “level of severity” by putting a scale of low, medium and high
- In Quality Center one is able to attach a screen print as proof of testing.
Room for Improvement:
- GUI colours not that great
- On the defect site, when one adds a comment, anybody who has access to the same defect can change the initial comment. It would be great if the defect comments would not be editable.
I've never done a deployment.
Our organisation did not have any issues with the stability of this tool.
We were able to have a lot of users logged in at the same time with no lag time or any scalability related issues.
You should invest in Quality Center if you are looking for the following :
- High visibility of project progress
- If you cannot afford automation. or are not completely convinced but want to speed up their testing efforts, you can look into getting a Quality Center/ALM plug-in called Sprinter. A very good testing tool that is worth trying out.
If you want a quick and smooth transition from manual testing into automation. Its smooth because HP holds your hand until your team is able to execute QTP independently. They are also available to see you through any technically difficulties.
**Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Last updated: Oct 31 2015