We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"Work distribution among team members and accountability for completion with a clearer picture."
"Traceability reporting is inbuilt and includes all your requirements."
"The solution is pretty stable."
"IntelliSense and CodeLens are helpful because they can show you details about your function, such as how many times it is called from other places within the code."
"The most valuable feature is the code management, where there is sharing of code for developers and it is distributed within the organization."
"I am not familiar with any issues with respect to stability, and I have never seen Team System crash."
"Microsoft makes great products. They are quite robust."
"The solution is scalable, stable and has allowed us to upgrade our frameworks."
"Teams need clearer pictures of resource availability in charts and dashboards along with plans."
"The solution is very heavily vendor dependent."
"The technical support could be better."
"I would like to see the inclusion of more programming languages, especially better support for Java."
"The user experience for the task assignment functionality, and more generally the software lifecycle development, needs to be improved."
"I have seen customizations with Team System that allowed it to integrate into other ticketing systems like Jira, which would be a really nice feature to see."
"When you go into the front-end, the web portal, if, for example, you pick up an issue, it would be ideal if the branch was automatically created in the repository. Right now, this isn't the case."
"Support response time could stand improvement."
"Licensing: The solution cost is high and should be brought down to increase competition."
"It's an expensive investment to make, so the decision should be driven on individual requirements."
"The price could be better."
IBM Engineering Workflow Management manages plans, tasks, the project status and acts as the critical link between required and delivered work. It provides flexibility to adapt to any process, which enables companies to adopt faster release cycles and manage dependencies across both small and complex development projects. This solution offers no-charge server software and flexible pricing models. It becomes a complete IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management solution—when purchased as a set of seamlessly integrated tools: IBM Engineering Workflow Management, IBM Engineering Test Management, and IBM Engineering Requirements Management DOORS Next.
Microsoft Visual Studio Team System is a platform for productive, integrated, and extensible software development life-cycle tools that helps software teams by improving communication and collaboration throughout the software development process.
IBM Engineering Workflow Management is ranked 1st in Software Configuration Management with 2 reviews while Visual Studio Team System is ranked 5th in Software Configuration Management with 6 reviews. IBM Engineering Workflow Management is rated 6.6, while Visual Studio Team System is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of IBM Engineering Workflow Management writes "Great inbuilt traceability reporting; unfortunately, the solution is heavily vendor dependent". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Visual Studio Team System writes "Good code management and sharing capability, but needs better integration with the documentation". IBM Engineering Workflow Management is most compared with Jira, Microsoft Azure DevOps, CA Endevor Software Change Manager, codeBeamer ALM and Rally Software, whereas Visual Studio Team System is most compared with . See our IBM Engineering Workflow Management vs. Visual Studio Team System report.
See our list of best Software Configuration Management vendors.
We monitor all Software Configuration Management 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.