Anonymous UserSr. Director, Software Engineering Director at a healthcare company
Anonymous UserSr. Project Manager at University of Utah Hospitals & Clinics
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"The most valuable feature for me is the ability to enter data into one table, or context, and link it across modules."
"The solution is stable."
"The program is very stable."
"I really like the customization that can be done using the DOORS Extension Language (DXL)."
"It is very customizable and easy to scale."
"The most valuable feature is the management verification and login."
"This product can help improve how your organization proceeds through solution development."
"We have different generations of all products. It lets us select and see unique attributes for each release or generation. You can use attributes to define a selection area to see which equipments are for the old versions and which ones are for the new versions. This inbuilt view is what I like in IBM Rational DOORS. So, for a database and a set of requirements, it will select and show unique attributes for a release or a generation."
"The ability to reuse test cases already used across projects is the most valuable feature of this solution. We don't need to create new ones."
"The user-friendly features are the most valuable. For example, migration of requirements and migration of test cases and the creation of traceability. You have various reports that you need. The plug-ins that are available to connect with the other tools."
"The reporting functionality helps vendors and technical resources identify bugs and issues that need to be addressed. The simple dashboard-style home page makes training end-user testers simple and straightforward. The actual testing UI is VERY straightforward and very intuitive for the end-users that test the system since very often we pull from business and operational users to help test new systems."
"It would have been ok ten years ago, but we are used to having better tools now."
"It's difficult to set the code on the solution."
"The kind of dashboard is not very convenient."
"There are problems with communicating between DOORS and Microsoft Office."
"The interface is not very user-friendly and has not evolved in a long time."
"The problem is that because the GUI is so bad, you either have to spend a lot of money customizing the interface yourself, or a lot of money on training."
"IBM should integrate some solutions they already own toenhance the utility of the product further. Specifically import and export to Office products is more difficult than it needs to be."
"Complexity, performance, openness are the three areas that can be improved. The IBM architecture and specifically Jazz looks more complex. There are a lot of servers. It's quite complicated. The search capabilities lack in IBM Rational DOORS Classic for customers who have a database with a requirement of more than 25,000 records. For example, you can search easily for a module, but it's really difficult to look for keywords through the whole database because all the modules are separated into small components, which makes the search quite complex. This is something that's really annoying because when we want to make an impact analysis, we would like to analyze the product globally. It's quite difficult to manage. The fact that you can interact externally with data makes it complex. The approach is complex and doesn't work as expected. For example, when I tried to experiment with exporting some records, the tool crashed, but I couldn't find out the root cause, that is, whether it happened because of Rational Windows or lack of memory. It was just crashing. Logs weren't very clear. IBM can try to use more recent technology for different aspects and make it easy. They can also provide free integration from DOORS Classic to DOORS. Currently, all the customization in Excel is lost, which makes it very complex. It would be a feature to make new versions compatible with features in the past versions."
"It should develop integration with JIRA. We have some complexities which caused us not to decide to integrate it with our JIRA, like synchronous data."
"Migrating is not very easy. It depends on the organization, how efficient and effective the decision-making process is. The plug-ins should be easier and more integrated rather than the user trying to integrate the tools which are more popular, like Jira et al."
"The UI for managing test cases, test sets, test runs could be a little more integrated, currently, these feel disjointed at times and confusing. Also, the test steps page needs to display the test steps closer to the top of the UI so as to not have to scroll down to find."
"Licensing fees are billed annually and there is no support included with what I pay."
"Pricing can vary depending on the size of the organization and how contracts are negotiated."
"IBM is a bit too expensive in terms of pricing. Customers are paying a lot for the license, and the price is quite high for this kind of environment. It is quite high as compared to what we can get today with other solutions."
"It is expensive to onboard additional users."
IBM Rational DOORS is ranked 2nd in Application Requirements Management with 14 reviews while Inflectra SpiraTest is ranked 4th in Application Requirements Management with 3 reviews. IBM Rational DOORS is rated 7.4, while Inflectra SpiraTest is rated 9.4. The top reviewer of IBM Rational DOORS writes "Has given us a means for improving the way we proceed through solution development". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Inflectra SpiraTest writes "User friendly with ease of testing requirements management, migration from other tools and als othe integration with other testing tools". IBM Rational DOORS is most compared with Jira, Polarion Requirements, IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation, PTC Integrity Requirements Connector and Jama Connect, whereas Inflectra SpiraTest is most compared with Jira, Micro Focus ALM Quality Center, TestRail by Gurock, Micro Focus ALM Octane and Tricentis Tosca. See our IBM Rational DOORS vs. Inflectra SpiraTest report.
See our list of best Application Requirements Management vendors.
We monitor all Application Requirements 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.