We performed a comparison between Atlassian ALM 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 most valuable feature is the Scrum board."
"The main power of this tool is the integration between the different products of the Atlassian suite. We have good integration with work management with Java. This is the major strength from this provider."
"This solution fits very well into our agile product management environment."
"Most of the features that I like the best are more on the analytics side."
"Templates: Allows us to standardize fields, workflows throughout hundreds of HPE ALM projects."
"It's basically the way to show the work that we do as QA testers, and to have a historical view of those executions."
"It provides visibility on release status and readiness."
"Having the links maintained within the tool is a huge boon to reporting requirements, tests, and defects."
"Defect management is very good."
"Business process management is the most valuable feature of the solution."
"I like the traceability, especially between requirements, testing, and defects."
"The automation for scheduling software and doing software tests should be simplified because it's complex and too rigid."
"The reports are not really customizable, which is something that they should improve on."
"There is room for improvement in the high-level project management."
"Cross project reporting is limited to similar database schemas"
"It needs Pure-FTPd WebUI and single sign-on."
"ALM uses a waterfall approach. We have some hybrid approaches in the company and need a more agile approach."
"It can be quite clunky, and it can easily be configured badly, which I've seen in a couple of places. If it is configured badly, it can be very hard to use. It is not so easy to integrate with other products. I've not used Micro Focus in a proper CI/CD pipeline, and I haven't managed to get that working because that has not been my focus. So, I find it hard. I've often lost the information because it had committed badly. It doesn't commit very well sometimes, but that might have to do with the sites that I was working at and the way they had configured it."
"Is not very user-friendly."
"If they could improve their BPT business components that would be good"
"There's room for improvement on the reporting side of things and the scheduling, in general, is a bit clunky."
"We cannot rearrange the Grid in the Test Lab. It is in alphabetical order right now. But sometimes a user will want to see, for example, the X column next to the B column. If they came out with that it would be useful for us. They are working on that, as we have raised that request with Micro Focus."
More OpenText ALM / Quality Center Pricing and Cost Advice →
Atlassian ALM is ranked 16th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 6 reviews while OpenText ALM / Quality Center is ranked 6th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 197 reviews. Atlassian ALM is rated 7.6, while OpenText ALM / Quality Center is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Atlassian ALM writes "Scrum board feature is highly valuable and handles different user volumes". 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 ". Atlassian ALM is most compared with Jira, Microsoft Azure DevOps, TFS, IBM Rational ALM and Polarion ALM, 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.
