We performed a comparison between Codebeamer and OpenText ALM Octane based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution easily replaces IBM DOORS, which no longer offers maintenance in China."
"There is a lot of complexity involved, meaning it can do many things, which can be quite useful."
"The traceability is so simple that I don't need to do any additional configurations related to traceability."
"CodeBeamer provides full traceability, excellent collaboration, regulatory compliance, and instant reporting with its holistic approach from requirement management to testing."
"It is a stable solution."
"The platform provided the flexibility to expand our business processes, accommodating or altering them to suit the requirements of a changing environment."
"You can track the metrics in the Agile dashboard very easily."
"Codebeamer's API-based integration and many other integration aspects with other solutions are very powerful."
"It’s easy to set up."
"I like the fact that you can use it on top of Jira."
"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."
"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."
"On the user side, what I like a lot is the reporting capabilities. There's no tool, to my knowledge, that gets anywhere close to Octane at the moment when it comes to the reporting capabilities. I can do everything with the reporting. There's nothing missing. I have all the options. I can create graphs, including graphs of several types and looks."
"An improvement on previous versions because it comes as preconfigured as possible."
"The dashboards and metric reporting are valuable features."
"We like Micro Focus ALM Octane because its performance is okay, and its stability is okay, so we use it a lot. The platform is easy to use."
"I would like to see more, easily trackable reports."
"The search and replace feature within the tool itself could be improved."
"The solution has a very small market share in China. It's almost like a startup."
"It's still a fairly new tool that lacks maturity right now."
"Usability needs to be improved."
"We would like to see more industry-specific features that are tailored to the vertical markets."
"During migrations from other platforms to CodeBeamer, there have been instances where we encountered issues that required redoing certain tasks."
"The product's UI is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"Currently, Micro Focus ALM Octane is considered an old-world tool in the industry and lacks the perception of being a new-age tool among its customers."
"Development of extensions or connections to GitHub actions could be better. Better integration with Azure DevOps would also help."
"The product's requirements management feature needs enhancement in terms of functionality."
"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."
"The reporting is lacking from a requirements matrix and a traceability perspective."
"The elements in filtering need to be improved, meaning the number of filters I can use in widgets or in the grid views in parallel. There's a limitation which bothers a lot of our users. Filtering in text, or having a complex filter is limited. In a given field, for example, I can use a filter only once. I cannot say, 'Include the values 1, 2, and 3, and exclude value 17.' This is not possible but we have requested it often."
"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"
"I have yet to experience the CI/CD part of Micro Focus ALM Octane but as demonstrated by the team who is providing the services, I see that the CI/CD could improve. When we check in the code, for the code snippet that has been checked in by a particular user, you need to open a separate file. When comparing Micro Focus ALM Octane to Jira, they have a separate window in which you can click on the ID and the code is visible in the snippet. It's a two-step process in Micro Focus ALM Octane and it's a single-step process in Jira. It's essential for the developers to think about this difference."
Codebeamer is ranked 9th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 10 reviews while OpenText ALM Octane is ranked 5th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 38 reviews. Codebeamer is rated 7.8, while OpenText ALM Octane is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Codebeamer writes "Has good technical support services, but the migration process needs improvement". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText ALM Octane writes "Reporting engine, widgets, and dashboards are a huge plus, and powerful REST interface means we can interact with other tools". Codebeamer is most compared with PTC Integrity, Polarion ALM, Microsoft Azure DevOps, Jira and OpenText ALM / Quality Center, whereas OpenText ALM Octane is most compared with Jira, OpenText ALM / Quality Center, Microsoft Azure DevOps, Rally Software and ServiceNow Strategic Portfolio Management. See our Codebeamer vs. OpenText ALM Octane report.
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.
