Compare IBM Rational ALM vs. Micro Focus ALM Octane

IBM Rational ALM is ranked 10th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 4 reviews while Micro Focus ALM Octane is ranked 2nd in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 12 reviews. IBM Rational ALM is rated 7.2, while Micro Focus ALM Octane is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of IBM Rational ALM writes "Helped with time management, improved our resource utility, and helped assure on-time completion". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Micro Focus ALM Octane writes "Saves time by making the most important information and functions available with one or two clicks". IBM Rational ALM is most compared with JIRA, Microsoft Azure DevOps and TFS, whereas Micro Focus ALM Octane is most compared with JIRA, Micro Focus ALM and Microsoft Azure DevOps.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Atlassian, Micro Focus, Microsoft and others in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites. Updated: September 2019.
366,918 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros
It helped us contain critical things, like source code and several documents, which is very important to us.It is relatively easy to use and user-friendly once the setup is complete.The cataloging is a very valuable feature. For a lot of enterprises, they end up not knowing which applications do specific features. The cataloging helps with this. It's not that verbose, but it still gives you allowances to put in more detail.The planning feature is rich with Scrum concepts: Sprint, Sprint retrospective, the rules in the Scrum framework.

Read more »

Octane creates a gentle approach to Agile-based projects.The concept of Octane is to have the most information and the most important functions available with one or two clicks. This is a big point of savings, in time and money... The powerful widgets, the Dashboard module, the ability to drill down to the information you need and the ability to configure it to your needs, are big advantages.The general capabilities of Octane, setting up rules instead of programming VBA scripts for controlling the workflow, and making life easier for the users with the template functionalities, are very big benefits.The openness and the possibilities of the REST API, from an operations and maintenance perspective, are a big plus.We are seeing some real improvements in the way we do things. We are becoming more agile in the way we do it because of that and in a way that stories are managed. Stories are given lifecycles as opposed to just being entities within a tool.The integration points are very good. Octane gives us a window not only into our manual testing, but also our automation testing and our performance testing. We can see all results from all three streams of testing in one place.It's brought our entire team into a single tool. We're all looking at the same real-time data. Our project management office has been able to set up dashboards for individual teams, and do comparisons by teams, of integration, and cross-team integration, burn-up, burn-down, and cumulative flow...The way testing is closely tied into the product Backlog has made it more intuitive, or easier to manage the relationship between building out an application and testing it. In other tools, that is more segregated. The way it's designed in Octane, people have said it makes more sense to them, and that it's easier for them to understand their data and to maintain and test their solutions.

Read more »

Cons
Of course it would be related to customer experience. The solution is not user friendly at all. It needs an expert to use it, although the reporting feature was okay.There is not enough beginner support material in the form of FAQs or simple training to help you get started.The features should be more intuitive. If I'm looking for something, its location should be easy to locate.I would like to see better reporting features. The out-of-box reporting is - I don't want to say limited - but the focus is on the Scrum and Sprint reports. We need more reporting features regarding the history of the work, tracking it more deeply.

Read more »

Improvements could be made by way of additional integrations across the lifecycle.An example of one of the features we have requested is inheriting information from a test suite into a suite run and into a menu run, so the user does not have to add that information, update it manually.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.There's a trend in our requests to have the ability to export data, en masse, out of Octane. There are capabilities within Octane to export data, but there are specifics around test suites and requirements and relations, as well as certain attributes, that we would like to be able to export easily out of Octane and into a database or Excel.We have some requests to beef up the manual testing abilities and the ability to report on testing progress. All the basics are there, but there's an issue of maintainability. For example... once you plan a test and it creates a run, more particularly a suite run, you can't edit the suite run afterward... That that is not realistic with how people work. Mistakes are made and people are humans and we change our minds about things. So the tool needs to allow for a bit more flexibility in that testing area, as well as some better widgets to report on progress.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 solutionThe Requirements Module could be better, to build up a better requirements process. There's a huge improvement from ALM.NET to Octane, but it's still not really facilitating all the needs of the product owners, to set up their requirements in Octane.Because JIRA is a leading tool for both development and requirements management - everybody is using JIRA - I'm pretty there will be a use case where people are trying to connect between ALM Octane and JIRA. The back-end configuration of the synchronization with JIRA could be simplified. The architecture is really complicated. We required a lot of machines to build the cluster and the configuration was not really clearly described within the documentation. This may have something to do with the fact that the software is pretty new.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
Information Not Available
For what it does, it's very reasonably priced. I like the licensing model as well, because it's very flexible. You can scale licenses up and down for short periods of time.In terms of pricing, it's comparable to what we had previously. It's not priced at the higher end of the scale by any means. It's priced nicely, in the middle of the market. For what you're getting, it's a very good tool.It's expensive. HPE products, and now Micro Focus, have always been expensive. The license is not cheap, and it will always be a challenge, particularly for small organizations like ours.It's pretty pricey, one of the most expensive ones on the market... The value depends on if you use all the features that it has. It comes with a lot of features. The difference between the license structure of ALM and Octane versus JIRA, is that you get everything with ALM and Octane... For JIRA, you buy the pieces one piece at a time.It will be as expensive as ALM.NET, if not more expensive. But here's a good tip: If you have ALM.NET, you are able to share your licenses from ALM.NET to Octane. You just have to define a dedicated number of licenses on ALM.NET and then you can share them with ALM Octane, with some configuration effort. This is something that you have to take into account, that there is a possibility of such license sharing that could decrease your costs. Compared to open-source tools, the price the ALM Octane is definitely higher, in terms of the licensing cost.Pricing is the weakest point. It is expensive, but the tool has plenty of features. The main problem we have is that the pricing is very high compared to some other solutions.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions are best for your needs.
366,918 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
Views
1,413
Comparisons
1,123
Reviews
1
Average Words per Review
417
Avg. Rating
8.0
Views
10,744
Comparisons
6,388
Reviews
14
Average Words per Review
1,868
Avg. Rating
8.2
Top Comparisons
Compared 46% of the time.
Compared 9% of the time.
Compared 51% of the time.
Also Known As
Rational ALM, MKSMicro Focus Octane
Learn
IBM
Micro Focus
Overview
Lifecycle management capabilities built on the open, unifying IBM Rational Jazz platform can help agile and traditional teams: see at-a-glance status, access better data for decisions, manage costs, reuse the most efficient processes across the organization, manage cloud, web, SOA and mobile application design and development. Teams can also gain real-time traceability, manage work across vendors, unify across a diverse set of lifecyle tools, and provide collaborative development for continuous delivery as part of the IBM DevOps solution.In support of the bimodal nature of many customers today, Micro Focus has expanded the ALM experience by introducing ALM Octane, as a separate platform that is tuned and designed for high-velocity, Lean and Agile teams. ALM Octane is an included part of the ALM product, and integrates with both Micro Focus Agile Manager and the traditional Micro Focus ALM.NET platform to allow teams to easily share assets and report across projects.
Offer
Learn more about IBM Rational ALM
Learn more about Micro Focus ALM Octane
Sample Customers
Tennis Australia, WeCloud AB, Port Otago Limited, Logicalis US, Valmer, The Chevrolet Volt, Ashurst
Information Not Available
Top Industries
No Data Available
REVIEWERS
Transportation Company30%
Financial Services Firm30%
Consumer Goods10%
Comms Service Provider10%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company38%
Manufacturing Company10%
Financial Services Firm9%
Government8%
Company Size
No Data Available
REVIEWERS
Large Enterprise100%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business3%
Large Enterprise97%
Find out what your peers are saying about Atlassian, Micro Focus, Microsoft and others in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites. Updated: September 2019.
366,918 professionals have used our research since 2012.
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.
Sign Up with Email