We performed a comparison between Agile Manager [EOL] and Jira based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Atlassian, Nutanix and others in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites."How you write your user stories, and the requirements gathering, in Agile Manager is pretty good."
"In terms of product management, Jira increases productivity and visibility into the product. Those are the top benefits this tool provides to the team. Also, it's accessible to the executives and whoever wants to sign on to Jira to see what's going on."
"The features that we find most valuable are the Workflow, Scrum workflow, and Dashboards."
"The most valuable features are that it is good for tracking the issues and it provides for the usage of Confluence."
"The most valuable aspect of this solution is its ability to connect everything together."
"It includes by default all the necessary tools for a project manager to work and make their work more efficient."
"The traceability mapping feature is something that became very useful, especially during releases and bug fixes."
"It provides very good visibility and traceability. You can clearly see each and every part of a process. It is also user-friendly and robust. It is working well, and there are a lot of add-ons or plug-ins out there that you can use."
"The solution works well and does what it needs to do."
"The testing module that we are used to, that wasn't there at all."
"In general, although we use JIRA, we never really learned how to use it properly. The learning curve of the solution is high. It has a lot of power, and yet we don't understand its capabilities."
"End-to-end management from product backlog to test completion could be improved."
"In JIRA, it's a bit complex in terms of what advanced search queries we use. Sharing them is also a problem. Because TFS is on the cloud, we can easily save that query and share it with our team members."
"Sometimes, we create the same bug with two or three different Jira tickets in my company, which leads to duplication, making it an area where improvements are required."
"There needs to be more integration and connectivity."
"JIRA still has their own backtracking tools. It should have a better visibility into HPE UFT. Most people use functional testing tools, like QTP. They need to improve their integration to make it seamless."
"From a very software-centric or a lead developer standpoint, there should be the ability to work at multiple levels. You have epic stories and use cases or epic stories and tasks. It would be nice to be able to have multiple levels of stories and multiple levels of epics work with it. It's lacking a little bit there, and this is the big thing for me because it makes it difficult to do a real sprint when you're limited to one story per epic. It's really hard to isolate tasks at multiple levels to match the type of use cases you normally do. That's the biggest difficulty. Other than that, they've been improving year to year, and every version seems to have a level of improvement."
"Could be more stable with more integrations."
Earn 20 points
Agile Manager [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites while Jira is ranked 2nd in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 259 reviews. Agile Manager [EOL] is rated 7.6, while Jira is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Agile Manager [EOL] writes "We have the ability to define common standard procedures and methodologies. I'm looking for better integration using Octane". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Jira writes "A great centralized tool that has a good agile framework and is useful for day-to-day planning, task management, and work log efficacy". Agile Manager [EOL] is most compared with , whereas Jira is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, IBM Rational DOORS, OpenText ALM Octane, Rally Software and Polarion ALM.
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.