We performed a comparison between Eggplant Test and OpenText ALM / Quality Center based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Test Management Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We are able to now automate tests, which so far have been manual."
"DAI's newest release allows us to test via scripts rather than models, because we have done 95 percent of our development in functional, not through modeling. I am really happy that then we can use the controller to run scripts rather than having to translate things to models. There are lots of options."
"It is easy to set up."
"Everything is happening on the layout or display that is used by the user. Eggplant prompts processes, like 'click here,' or 'look for this image.' Eggplant makes it possible for QA people and BAs, working in the actual display, to check if the software is providing the right images, the right text, and the right results. They don't have to go inside the code or to the TCP/IP layer. Everything is happening at the highest level."
"The features that we like the most are the developer interface and the ability to quickly develop and deploy tests."
"The most valuable features of Eggplant Digital Automation Intelligence are bug hunting and OCR technology."
"Its scalability is good. It is useful for desktop applications, and it also uses OCR and does image recognition."
"The main feature of Eggplant Test is that it can do fully automated web testing and app testing."
"Quality management, project management from a QA perspective - testing, defect management, how testing relates back to requirements."
"It is stable and reliable."
"Business process management is the most valuable feature of the solution."
"By using QC we broke down silos (of teams), improved the organization of our tests, have a much better view of the testing status, and became much quicker in providing test results with document generation."
"The most valuable feature is the ST Add-In. It's a Microsoft add-in that makes it much easier to upload test cases into Quality Center."
"Produces good reports and has a great traceability feature."
"We can get an entire project into a single repository where we can view all the data in detail. This is where we keep all our test cases where everyone can reference them. This provides everyone access to the test cases and artifacts via the cloud. There is no need to contact anyone."
"I love linking/associating the requirements to a test case. That's where I get to know my requirement coverage, which helps a lot at a practical level. So, we use the traceability and visibility features a lot. This helps us to understand if there are any requirements not linked to any test case, thus not getting tested at all. That missing link is always very visible, which helps us to create our requirement traceability matrix and maintain it in a dynamic way. Even with changing requirements, we can keep on changing or updating the tool."
"The solution would crash from time to time."
"It has low productivity."
"We found that we had issues regarding the VPN setup, which is one of the reasons that we did not purchase this solution."
"They need to update the Linux. I think it's kind of an outdated Java Swing application."
"A step forward would be to have event support, because it is more or less linear at the moment."
"In terms of additional features, it would be helpful to have one package for all testing. You have the manager, the AI, then you have functional, and about 10 different packages for installing."
"There was no free trial in it."
"The IDE could be even more full-featured. Because I was a developer, I was very spoiled by either Visual Studio Code or Visual Studio for shortcuts. For example, I was able to say "ctor" and hit Tab and it would create a template of a constructor for me... It would be great, when I want to create a new function, if there were shortcut commands like those that helped create all of the functions, or if there were shortcut features to do any of the complex plans."
"The product is good, it's great, but when compared to other products with the latest methodologies, or when rating it as a software development tool, then I'll have to rate it with a lower score because there's a lot of other great tools where you can interconnect them, use them, scale them, and leverage. It all depends on the cost."
"If the solution could create a lighter, more flexible tool with more adaptability to new methodologies such as agile, it would be great."
"ALM Quality Center could be improved with more techniques to manage Agile processes."
"We have had a poor experience with customer service and support."
"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."
"Quality Center's UI is outdated, and it's a little bit slow on the login part and different parts of the application. That's why we're switching solutions. I believe most companies are switching to Octane or something else. Micro Focus should enhance the interface and reports."
"Currently, what's missing in the solution is the ability for users to see the ongoing scenarios and the status of those scenarios versus the requirements. As for the management tools, they also need to be improved so users can have a better idea of what's going on in just one look, so they can manage testing activities better."
"There is room for improvement in the scalability and stability of the solution."
More OpenText ALM / Quality Center Pricing and Cost Advice →
Eggplant Test is ranked 8th in Test Management Tools with 16 reviews while OpenText ALM / Quality Center is ranked 1st in Test Management Tools with 197 reviews. Eggplant Test is rated 7.8, while OpenText ALM / Quality Center is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Eggplant Test writes "Empowers effective test automation with comprehensive platform coverage and scalability". 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 ". Eggplant Test is most compared with Selenium HQ, Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, SmartBear TestComplete and froglogic Squish, whereas OpenText ALM / Quality Center is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, OpenText ALM Octane, Jira, Tricentis qTest and Zephyr Enterprise. See our Eggplant Test vs. OpenText ALM / Quality Center report.
See our list of best Test Management Tools vendors.
We monitor all Test Management Tools 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.