Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about ALM Octane vs. Parasoft Development Testing Platform and other solutions.
309,398 professionals have used our research since 2012.
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
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.
The general capabilities of Octane, setting up rules instead of programming VBA scripts for controlling the workflow, and making life easier for the users with the template functionalities, are very big benefits.
It really helps developers execute scenarios through DTP and share reports/results across the teams.
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.
There is an opportunity for them to do a little more with the dashboarding. We still feel that HPE Quality Center/HPE ALM reporting is very powerful. We talked with R&D, and there are some things on their roadmap, but at the same time, their strategy is to connect Octane with visualization tools such as Power BI.
Parallel execution: It would help it multiple executions could be done at the same time.
Pricing and Cost Advice
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.
out of 38 in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
out of 38 in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
Compared 64% of the time.
Compared 16% of the time.
Compared 6% of the time.
Compared 100% of the time.
Also Known As
|Micro Focus ALM Octane||Parasoft Concerto, Parasoft DTP|
|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.||Parasoft Concerto is a Software Development Management infrastructure that increases productivity and reduces costs. Parasoft Concerto complements an organization's existing technical infrastructure, connecting distributed components in order to better facilitate natural human workflow. Parasoft Concerto manages "what" needs to be accomplished within the context of "how" management expects those tasks to be accomplished.|
Learn more about ALM Octane
Learn more about Parasoft Development Testing Platform
Information Not Available
|Comcast, Lufthansa, Samsung,CAE, Canon, FedEx|
Financial Services Firm33%
Comms Service Provider11%
Software R&D Company20%
Financial Services Firm15%
No Data Available