We performed a comparison between OpenText ALM / Quality Center and TFS 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 integration with UFT is nice."
"The test-case repository and linkage through to regression requirements will absolutely be a key component for us. We haven't got it yet, but when we've got an enterprise regression suite, that will be a key deliverable for them. We will be able to have all of the regression suite in one place, linked to the right requirements."
"The ability to integrate this solution with other applications is helpful. If there is automation, it comes with improved quality and speed."
"The AI and functionality interface are useful."
"ALM Quality Center's best features are the test lab, requirement tab, and report dashboard."
"So the first impression that hits me about HP UFT 14.0 (formerly QTP) is that it seems to be a whole lot faster! But that could be subjective, as I'm running it on a high end gaming system."
"The most valuable user feature that we use right now is the camera."
"The product can scale."
"It is very user-friendly."
"The most valuable feature of TFS is integration."
"The most valuable feature is integration, particularly if you have a .NET application."
"As far as queries are concerned, creating, grading, or customizing the queries as a primary requirement is very easy to do."
"The most valuable feature from my point of view is project management, which includes user stories as well as task management."
"I feel that the test plan and test tools are more manageable in TFS."
"TFS is very user-friendly."
"TFS’s test management capability without the expensive licensing has large gaps. Users will be unable to access performance testing and coded UI testing capabilities."
"ALM only works on Internet Explorer. It doesn't work on any other browser. In my opinion, Internet Explorer is generally a bit slower. I would like to see it work on Chrome or on other browsers."
"The Agile methodology is now being used across all the organizations, but in this solution, we don't have a dashboard like Jira. In Jira, you can move your product backlogs from one space to another and see the progress, that is, whether a backlog is in the development stage or testing stage. Micro Focus ALM Quality Center does not have this feature. It is typically very straightforward. You just execute the test cases from it, and you just make them pass, fail, or whatever. They can also improve its integration with Jira. The browser support needs to be improved in this because it supports only Internet Explorer as of now. It does not have support for Firefox, Chrome, Safari, or any other browser. There are also some performance issues in it. Let's say that you are doing the testing, and you found something and are logging the defect. When you try to attach several or multiple screenshots with the defect, it slows down, which is a very common problem people face. I would like them to include a functionality where I am able to see the reports across all the projects. When you have multiple projects, being a manager, I would like to see the reports across all the projects. Currently, there is no single sign-on through which we can get all the information at one place. You need to log into it project-wise. If you have ten projects, you can't view the information in one dashboard."
"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."
"There's room for improvement in the requirements traceability with Micro Focus ALM Quality Center. That could use an uplift."
"I'd like to see the concept of teams put into it."
"It's not intuitive in that way, which has always been a problem, especially with business users."
"There are always new features and more support for new and legacy technology architectures with each release. But the bad news is a growing list of long-standing issues with the product rarely gets addressed."
"It is not a scalable solution."
"There should be management of the project built-in."
"In the next release, I would like them to include integration for various projects, similar to what JIRA has, and they could create this feature on the dashboard."
"The execution of test cases could stand improvement."
"The overall reports in TFS could improve. Additionally, there should be an easier way to migrate from an older version to a newer one."
"TFS is scalable with different Microsoft tools for test management but it is not scalable with other third-party tools."
"Access and permissions are confusing when attempting to include basic manual testing functionalities."
"I'm looking for specific options that aren't currently available, such as active status, new status, or what's currently in progress."
"The program and portfolio planning facility can be improved."
More OpenText ALM / Quality Center Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText ALM / Quality Center is ranked 6th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 197 reviews while TFS is ranked 3rd in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 93 reviews. OpenText ALM / Quality Center is rated 8.0, while TFS is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of OpenText ALM / Quality Center writes "Offers features for higher-end traceability and integration with different tools but lacks in scalability ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of TFS writes "It is helpful for scheduled releases and enforcing rules, but it should be better at merging changes for multiple developers and retaining the historical information". OpenText ALM / Quality Center is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, OpenText ALM Octane, Jira, Tricentis qTest and Rally Software, whereas TFS is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, Jira, Rally Software, Visual Studio Test Professional and TestRail. See our OpenText ALM / Quality Center vs. TFS report.
See our list of best Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites vendors and best Test Management Tools 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.
