We performed a comparison between AgileCraft and OpenText ALM / Quality Center 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."The linking of PI Objectives with different features was one of the cool things. It had features, epics, and stories out of the box."
"By standardizing our template, we publish reports at the business unit level."
"From reporting to team management, everything is better now."
"Having used the tool before, I like the use of parameters, being able to do exports and reports of the data for monitoring of executions, and the defect management as well. I feel satisfaction in that area."
"Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is quite stable."
"As a stand-alone test management tool, it's a good tool."
"The test-case repository and linkage through to regression requirements will absolutely be a key component for us. We haven't got it yet, but when we've got an enterprise regression suite, that will be a key deliverable for them. We will be able to have all of the regression suite in one place, linked to the right requirements."
"This solution is open and very easy to integrate. The interface is good too."
"The stability is very good."
"It should just have the integration with Jira. We haven't looked at it since Atlassian bought the product."
"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."
"The version of Micro Focus ALM that we use only works through Internet Explorer (IE). We have to communicate to everyone that they can only use IE with the solution. This is a big limitation. We should be free to use any type of browser or operating system. We have customers and partners who are unable to log into the system and enter their defects because they work on a different operating system."
"It is pricey."
"The support is not good and the documentation is not consistent."
"I would rate it a 10 if it had the template functionality on the web side, had better interfaces between other applications, so that we didn't have dual data entry or have to set up our own migrations."
"The solution needs to offer support for Agile. Currently, ALM only supports Waterfall."
"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."
"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."
More OpenText ALM / Quality Center Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
AgileCraft is ranked 18th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites while OpenText ALM / Quality Center is ranked 6th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 197 reviews. AgileCraft is rated 7.0, while OpenText ALM / Quality Center is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of AgileCraft writes "Linking of PI Objectives with different features was cool, but it didn't have integration with Jira". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText ALM / Quality Center writes "Offers features for higher-end traceability and integration with different tools but lacks in scalability ". AgileCraft is most compared with Jira, Jira Align, Rally Software, Broadcom Clarity and TFS, whereas OpenText ALM / Quality Center is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, OpenText ALM Octane, Jira, Tricentis qTest and Zephyr Enterprise.
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.