Most Helpful Review
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
We are seeing some real improvements in the way we do things. We are becoming more agile in the way we do it because of that and in a way that stories are managed. Stories are given lifecycles as opposed to just being entities within a tool.
The integration points are very good. Octane gives us a window not only into our manual testing, but also our automation testing and our performance testing. We can see all results from all three streams of testing in one place.
It's brought our entire team into a single tool. We're all looking at the same real-time data. Our project management office has been able to set up dashboards for individual teams, and do comparisons by teams, of integration, and cross-team integration, burn-up, burn-down, and cumulative flow...
The way testing is closely tied into the product Backlog has made it more intuitive, or easier to manage the relationship between building out an application and testing it. In other tools, that is more segregated. The way it's designed in Octane, people have said it makes more sense to them, and that it's easier for them to understand their data and to maintain and test their solutions.
People really how easy it is to customize. In some previous tools, that has been very limited, or you had to know how to write code to do some of the customizations, or it was very confusing. Going back to the user interface, they've made the customization of the tool, the workspace settings, very easy for people to figure out and use.
With an Octane project, we have our automation, our requirements, our tests, our pipeline into build-and-deploy, and the ability to identify problem areas. It makes things quicker because it's more along the lines of an automated process.
A valuable feature is the pipeline, so that we can now connect to Jenkins and then have all the results from testing, from external, in the tool, so that we can see the whole approach from there. Also, We can work with labels so we have better filtering solutions than in ALM. And it's much smarter and leaner to use than ALM.
The concept of Octane is to have the most information and the most important functions available with one or two clicks. This is a big point of savings, in time and money... The powerful widgets, the Dashboard module, the ability to drill down to the information you need and the ability to configure it to your needs, are big advantages.
Reporting is much easier and faster than Micro Focus ALM, with CA AC built on web services... Also, the data is more granular when it comes to tasks, iterations, sprints, and releases.
I was able to create epics for our budgeting concerns and it helped me link everything together.
Having that view into features and roadmap from product to delivery teams, and where they are going, then execute on.
Its ability to scale.
Tech support is very responsive, helpful, and available.
It helps with getting the alignment between strategy and execution for the product teams, all the way down to the delivery teams.
CA Agile Central provides visibility into how teams are meeting business objectives.
CA Agile Central helps the entire organization run like one powerful team.
We've only had a few stability issues. Generally, we have issues following any deployment they do, so if they do a deployment on a Sunday, then we may have a couple of issues on a Monday or Tuesday.
There's a trend in our requests to have the ability to export data, en masse, out of Octane. There are capabilities within Octane to export data, but there are specifics around test suites and requirements and relations, as well as certain attributes, that we would like to be able to export easily out of Octane and into a database or Excel.
We have some requests to beef up the manual testing abilities and the ability to report on testing progress. All the basics are there, but there's an issue of maintainability. For example... once you plan a test and it creates a run, more particularly a suite run, you can't edit the suite run afterward... That that is not realistic with how people work. Mistakes are made and people are humans and we change our minds about things. So the tool needs to allow for a bit more flexibility in that testing area, as well as some better widgets to report on progress.
When I manage projects that are being created in ALM, I have a standard template, but I don't have a template for them in Octane. I literally have to create the project from the ground up every time, which for an administrator, is a nightmare solution
The Requirements Module could be better, to build up a better requirements process. There's a huge improvement from ALM.NET to Octane, but it's still not really facilitating all the needs of the product owners, to set up their requirements in Octane.
Because JIRA is a leading tool for both development and requirements management - everybody is using JIRA - I'm pretty there will be a use case where people are trying to connect between ALM Octane and JIRA. The back-end configuration of the synchronization with JIRA could be simplified. The architecture is really complicated. We required a lot of machines to build the cluster and the configuration was not really clearly described within the documentation. This may have something to do with the fact that the software is pretty new.
Also, while there is a Requirements Module in Octane, it is very plain. It's okay to have some requirements described there, but it's not really following the whole BDD approach. I would like to have more features for requirements in there.
An example of one of the features we have requested is inheriting information from a test suite into a suite run and into a menu run, so the user does not have to add that information, update it manually.
One problem I see is that if there is a dependent user story - for example, if my team is working on one thing and there is a dependent user story from another team - we can have a dependency created but we don't know if there is a change of status from the other team. That is something which is very important for Agile Central to look into so that if the other team makes any changes we will be notified as well.
I think there is a missing link with the development activity. Some developers are pushing in new versions of the code, but you cannot make the link from the user story to a specific application version.
A lot of the features that we would be looking to add, I am learning may not be within Agile Central, but part of another CA tool set.
CA Agile Central does not have a workflow tool included.
I think there needs to be some simplification. The team-level side can be challenging and complicated.
It could improve by being self-organizing: user stories, different hierarchies, and different perspectives. Not just as a single hierarchical structure, but something that can be multidimensional.
I would like to see more Kanban support. As it stands, it doesn't seem to have the features or the layouts that the teams really need to be able to execute their tasks. It almost tries to force you into more of a Scrum style.
More customization capabilities would be helpful. Providing a little bit more structure around how the system should be set up in terms of the hierarchy structure might be helpful as well.
Pricing and Cost Advice
For what it does, it's very reasonably priced. I like the licensing model as well, because it's very flexible. You can scale licenses up and down for short periods of time.
In terms of pricing, it's comparable to what we had previously. It's not priced at the higher end of the scale by any means. It's priced nicely, in the middle of the market. For what you're getting, it's a very good tool.
It's expensive. HPE products, and now Micro Focus, have always been expensive. The license is not cheap, and it will always be a challenge, particularly for small organizations like ours.
It's pretty pricey, one of the most expensive ones on the market... The value depends on if you use all the features that it has. It comes with a lot of features. The difference between the license structure of ALM and Octane versus JIRA, is that you get everything with ALM and Octane... For JIRA, you buy the pieces one piece at a time.
It will be as expensive as ALM.NET, if not more expensive. But here's a good tip: If you have ALM.NET, you are able to share your licenses from ALM.NET to Octane. You just have to define a dedicated number of licenses on ALM.NET and then you can share them with ALM Octane, with some configuration effort. This is something that you have to take into account, that there is a possibility of such license sharing that could decrease your costs. Compared to open-source tools, the price the ALM Octane is definitely higher, in terms of the licensing cost.
Pricing is the weakest point. It is expensive, but the tool has plenty of features. The main problem we have is that the pricing is very high compared to some other solutions.
It is expensive and may not be worthwhile for a small company.
From a price point, it's a cost effective solution for our needs.
The license costs are fairly high as compared to some of the other solutions out there.
Frankly, pricing is expensive and needs to be carefully planned for when budgeting.
out of 38 in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
out of 38 in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
Compared 60% of the time.
Compared 19% of the time.
Compared 6% of the time.
Compared 54% of the time.
Compared 18% of the time.
Compared 7% of the time.
Also Known As
|Micro Focus ALM Octane||Rally Enterprise, CA Agile Training, CA Agile Coaching, CA Agile Academy, CA Agile Management , CA ALM|
|Micro Focus||CA Technologies|
|In support of the bimodal nature of many customers today, Micro Focus has expanded the ALM experience by introducing ALM Octane, as a separate platform that is tuned and designed for high-velocity, Lean and Agile teams. ALM Octane is an included part of the ALM product, and integrates with both Micro Focus Agile Manager and the traditional Micro Focus ALM.NET platform to allow teams to easily share assets and report across projects.|
CA Agile Central is an enterprise-class platform that's purpose-built for scaling agile development practices. Provide a hub for teams to collaboratively plan, prioritize and track work on a synchronized cadence. Connect your development work to your company's most important business initiatives. Measure productivity, predictability, quality and responsiveness with real-time performance metrics.
Learn more about ALM Octane
Learn more about CA Agile Central
Information Not Available
|Physicians Mutual, Harvard Pilgrim HealthCare, Editora Abril, Tata Communications, Level 3 Communications, Seagate, TomTom, Philips, Hiscox, Physicians Mutual, MYOB|
Financial Services Firm30%
Software R&D Company30%
Financial Services Firm15%
Financial Services Firm18%
Comms Service Provider15%
Software R&D Company31%
Financial Services Firm11%
See also ALM Octane Reviews, CA Agile Central Reviews, and our list of Best Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites Companies.