Compare IBM Rational Quality Manager vs. Silk Central

IBM Rational Quality Manager is ranked 17th in Test Management Tools with 1 review while Silk Central is ranked 10th in Test Management Tools with 1 review. IBM Rational Quality Manager is rated 8.0, while Silk Central is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of IBM Rational Quality Manager writes "Fast and reliable with good customization capabilities". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Silk Central writes "A powerful platform and strong technical support help us to make the right decisions". IBM Rational Quality Manager is most compared with Micro Focus ALM Quality Center, Zephyr Enterprise and TFS, whereas Silk Central is most compared with Micro Focus ALM Quality Center, Zephyr Enterprise and Tricentis qTest.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Use IBM Rational Quality Manager? Share your opinion.
Find out what your peers are saying about Micro Focus, Tricentis, Microsoft and others in Test Management Tools. Updated: February 2020.
399,230 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's very reliable as a solution.

Read more »

The stability of this solution is very good. In our experience it is approximately ninety-nine percent.

Read more »

Cons
Currently, the user interface needs to be more user-friendly.

Read more »

We would also like to manage the integration testing end-to-end.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
Information Not Available
The cost of this tool, in terms of licensing, is not large.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Management Tools solutions are best for your needs.
399,230 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
17th
Views
1,608
Comparisons
974
Reviews
0
Average Words per Review
0
Avg. Rating
N/A
10th
Views
1,504
Comparisons
801
Reviews
1
Average Words per Review
1,007
Avg. Rating
8.0
Top Comparisons
Compared 11% of the time.
Compared 16% of the time.
Compared 8% of the time.
Also Known As
Rational Quality ManagerBorland Silk Central, Micro Focus Silk Central
Learn
IBM
Micro Focus
Overview
IBM Rational Quality Manager is a collaborative hub for business-driven software and systems quality across virtually any platform and type of testing. This software helps teams share information seamlessly, use automation to accelerate project schedules and report on metrics for informed release decisions. Rational Quality Manager helps quality assurance teams collaborate by sharing project information and status updates seamlessly so team members can synchronize teamwork throughout the lifecycle. It helps them automate by reducing labor-intensive activities to accelerate project schedules. In addition, it helps them govern by understanding and reporting on project metrics enabling accurate, reliable and timely release decisions.Silk Central is an open test management solution which unifies all test assets into one easy-to-use planning, tracking, reporting and execution hub. Silk Central enables you to gain control, collaboration and traceability across all areas of your software testing, whether your methodology is Agile, Traditional or hybrid. Silk Central provides integration of requirements, manual and automated tests, defect tools and your test execution, giving full traceability of the quality of your software testing regardless of role.
Offer
Learn more about IBM Rational Quality Manager
Learn more about Silk Central
Sample Customers
Ehrhardt, Cisco Systems, Anadolu Hayat Emeklilik, CareCore National, Itaƒ BBA, BarrAmBank Group, Krung Thai Computer Services, Deakin University
Find out what your peers are saying about Micro Focus, Tricentis, Microsoft and others in Test Management Tools. Updated: February 2020.
399,230 professionals have used our research since 2012.
We monitor all Test Management Tools 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.