OpenText ALM Octane vs Parasoft Development Testing Platform comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between OpenText ALM Octane and Parasoft Development Testing Platform based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Atlassian, Nutanix and others in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites.
To learn more, read our detailed Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites Report (Updated: March 2024).
768,415 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"The feature I found most valuable in Micro Focus ALM Octane is its ability to integrate with the CI/CD stack.""Current version of the solution is fairly stable.""Octane works well with the Jira portfolio to track the project with two methods: Agile and Waterfall. We can track all the testing in Waterfall or Agile and synchronize it with Agile tools.""On the user side, what I like a lot is the reporting capabilities. There's no tool, to my knowledge, that gets anywhere close to Octane at the moment when it comes to the reporting capabilities. I can do everything with the reporting. There's nothing missing. I have all the options. I can create graphs, including graphs of several types and looks.""We like Micro Focus ALM Octane because its performance is okay, and its stability is okay, so we use it a lot. The platform is easy to use.""The dashboards and metric reporting are valuable features.""It’s easy to set up.""Micro Focus' technical support is good."

More OpenText ALM Octane Pros →

"It really helps developers execute scenarios through DTP and share reports/results across the teams.""The most valuable feature is code coverage."

More Parasoft Development Testing Platform Pros →

Cons
"Currently, Micro Focus ALM Octane is considered an old-world tool in the industry and lacks the perception of being a new-age tool among its customers.""Technical support can be slow.""Also, while there is a Requirements Module in Octane, it is very plain. It's okay to have some requirements described there, but it's not really following the whole BDD approach. I would like to have more features for requirements in there.""Security and security management, meaning the integration of the security, could be enhanced. We know about Fortify, but it would be better to have security features in the original Octane platform without the need for another solution or another application.""I would like to see the mobile testing improved so that we can simply select a mobile device, then specify what parameters we want, and the testing will be run based on that.""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.""The reporting is lacking from a requirements matrix and a traceability perspective.""The elements in filtering need to be improved, meaning the number of filters I can use in widgets or in the grid views in parallel. There's a limitation which bothers a lot of our users. Filtering in text, or having a complex filter is limited. In a given field, for example, I can use a filter only once. I cannot say, 'Include the values 1, 2, and 3, and exclude value 17.' This is not possible but we have requested it often."

More OpenText ALM Octane Cons →

"The solution's speed has room for improvement.""Parallel execution: It would help it multiple executions could be done at the same time."

More Parasoft Development Testing Platform Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "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."
  • "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."
  • "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'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."
  • "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."
  • "Going forward, I think we will want to explore adding more licenses."
  • "The solution has reduced our testing costs."
  • More OpenText ALM Octane Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions are best for your needs.
    768,415 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:Hi Netanya Basically , it all depends on the use cases for your environment and the business needs. Hope the below data may be relevant to you for identifying your needs and deciding on the… more »
    Top Answer:The platform's most valuable feature is pipeline integration or continuous integration services.
    Top Answer:The product is highly priced compared to other tools. However, it offers substantial value. There is a distinction between OEM pricing and the final pricing for customers. They could understand the… more »
    Top Answer:The most valuable feature is code coverage.
    Top Answer:The solution's speed has room for improvement.
    Top Answer:We use the Parasoft Development Testing Platform to verify code coverage for static analysis in our unit tests.
    Ranking
    Views
    8,146
    Comparisons
    4,128
    Reviews
    12
    Average Words per Review
    534
    Rating
    8.0
    Views
    200
    Comparisons
    154
    Reviews
    1
    Average Words per Review
    217
    Rating
    8.0
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Micro Focus ALM Octane, Micro Focus Octane
    Parasoft Concerto, Parasoft DTP
    Learn More
    Overview

    OpenText ALM Octane helps organizations implement a “quality everywhere” approach and improve Agile and DevOps development and testing processes to improve the flow of work across the software delivery value stream. You can tightly align quality efforts from development to release, employ a broad range of tests anchored by automation, and continuously monitor and improve for increased throughput. OpenText fosters an open approach so that quality is visible, traceable, and continuously improved. By synchronizing quality and testing with Agile and DevOps processes, risks are mitigated early in the software delivery value stream – speeding the way for faster delivery and improved customer satisfaction.

    ALM Octane facilitates a tailored and scalable approach for large enterprises. You can deploy your way and minimize infrastructure needs with deployment options spanning on-premises, SaaS, and public cloud (Amazon Web Services and Microsoft Azure Marketplaces). Similarly, various licensing options can tailor the features to meet specific needs with support for thousands of concurrent users in geographically disperse locations.

    Parasoft DTP aggregates the results from across testing practices, providing intelligent and continuous monitoring of the testing outcomes for greater visibility into what is working — and what isn’t.  Includes:

    - Comprehensive Reports & Dashboards

    - Preconfigured compliance reporting

    - Customized Advanced Analytics

    - Interactive Navigation of Results

    - Traceability

    Sample Customers
    Orange, Airbus, Haufe Group, Kellogg's, Claro, Bon Secours, World Wide Technology
    General Motors, Lockheed Martin, Qualcomm, AAI Textron, Boeing, Fidelity, Johnson & Johnson, CIBC, Penske, Thales, Dell, 
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Comms Service Provider27%
    Financial Services Firm27%
    Transportation Company19%
    Consumer Goods Company4%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm27%
    Computer Software Company12%
    Manufacturing Company10%
    Government8%
    No Data Available
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business18%
    Midsize Enterprise3%
    Large Enterprise79%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business13%
    Midsize Enterprise8%
    Large Enterprise79%
    No Data Available
    Buyer's Guide
    Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
    March 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Atlassian, Nutanix and others in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites. Updated: March 2024.
    768,415 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    OpenText ALM Octane is ranked 5th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 38 reviews while Parasoft Development Testing Platform is ranked 15th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 4 reviews. OpenText ALM Octane is rated 8.2, while Parasoft Development Testing Platform is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of OpenText ALM Octane writes "Reporting engine, widgets, and dashboards are a huge plus, and powerful REST interface means we can interact with other tools". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Parasoft Development Testing Platform writes "Provides 100 percent code coverage, is stable, and scalable". OpenText ALM Octane is most compared with Jira, OpenText ALM / Quality Center, Microsoft Azure DevOps, Rally Software and GitLab, whereas Parasoft Development Testing Platform is most compared with Codebeamer.

    See our list of best Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites vendors.

    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.