We performed a comparison between IBM Rational DOORS and Parasoft Development Testing Platform based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM, Atlassian, Siemens and others in Application Requirements Management."The solution is stable."
"When you install DOORS locally, you have the flexibility to do what you want with the solution. You can add functionality and do many things that you can't do with other tools or do well enough to satisfy your users' requirements."
"The data logs are ver conveneint."
"Starting to use the solution is pretty straightforward. There isn't too much of a learning curve."
"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."
"It is a mature product that is stable."
"This product can help improve how your organization proceeds through solution development."
"It is a stable solution."
"The most valuable feature is code coverage."
"It really helps developers execute scenarios through DTP and share reports/results across the teams."
"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 would be helpful if Microsoft provided a more user-friendly interface for updating and querying updates. Additionally, if there was a way for users to notify developers of any changes in requirements, it would allow for faster and more efficient updates to the solution's architecture. This could be in the form of a notification system that alerts developers of any changes that need to be made. Additionally, the solution is document-driven and it should be more digital."
"The images are not clear. We have to use them as OLE objects. And in the testing part, I'm not sure how to link it with it. This is my main concern."
"The customer must also have the tool to import the changes and accept them as a part of the review."
"It would be nice if it could be scaled-down so that it could be installed and implemented without much learning or training."
"The interface needs an area to be able to type your query and actually be able to find them."
"I think there is probably room to improve by offering free training."
"It would have been ok ten years ago, but we are used to having better tools now."
"Parallel execution: It would help it multiple executions could be done at the same time."
"The solution's speed has room for improvement."
IBM Rational DOORS is ranked 1st in Application Requirements Management with 51 reviews while Parasoft Development Testing Platform is ranked 10th in Application Requirements Management with 4 reviews. IBM Rational DOORS is rated 8.0, while Parasoft Development Testing Platform is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of IBM Rational DOORS writes " Offers ability to automate tasks and to track changes within documents and compare different versions of requirements but modeling capabilities could benefit from a web-based tool ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Parasoft Development Testing Platform writes "Provides 100 percent code coverage, is stable, and scalable". IBM Rational DOORS is most compared with Polarion Requirements, Jira, Helix ALM, Jama Connect and IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation, whereas Parasoft Development Testing Platform is most compared with Codebeamer.
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.
