We performed a comparison between Microsoft Azure DevOps and OpenText ALM Octane based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It is a cloud-based system. So, it is stable and scalable."
"Before using this solution, we had to deploy our applications, from pre-production to production, manually."
"All of the features related to release management are very good."
"Monitoring is most valuable."
"The simplicity and ease of use are two features that we have found to be most valuable."
"It is possible to add third-party extensions to increase the usability of the product."
"The initial setup is quick and easy."
"There are great automation tools."
"The interface is user-friendly."
"The feature I found most valuable in Micro Focus ALM Octane is its ability to integrate with the CI/CD stack."
"The most useful feature of Micro Focus ALM Octane is the dashboards, they are easy to use."
"Backlog management is the most valuable feature. This was a capability that was missing or difficult to achieve in ALM Quality Center."
"I like the fact that you can use it on top of Jira."
"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."
"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 solution natively supports Agile-Waterfall hybrid software development at an enterprise scale. This is very important to us. Because even though the company wishes to go Agile, we still have projects which follow a Waterfall methodology. In order for us to accommodate both, we needed some sort of hybrid system. Because if we are using a fully Agile system, then the reporting might not be correctly extracted."
"The testing environment and different pipelining concepts can be improved."
"It should be able to handle the different types. There is ecosystems engineering, and there is software applications engineering. There is a need to bring these teams together, but the disciplines don't integrate very well, and so it won't work."
"The functions have too much dependency right now, so it makes it really, really hard to upgrade and make a change in the code."
"The tutorials for building pipelines are an area that is a bit technical for a beginner."
"Being more technology-agnostic through ease of integration would be beneficial."
"The solution is generally stable but not entirely issue-free."
"It is not that intuitive. Sometimes, it is hard to find some of the functions. I would like to have an old-fashioned menu structure to be able to easily find things. Its environment setup is not very good. They should improve the way it is set up for different screens and make it easier to find functionalities and maintain team members."
"The communication could work better, especially for the development team."
"I like their smart analytics; perhaps they should continue to expand and improve there because it's a fantastic start."
"The solution should improve by adding scrum board-like functionality."
"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."
"There is an opportunity for them to do a little more with the dashboarding. We still feel that HPE Quality Center/HPE ALM reporting is very powerful. We talked with R&D, and there are some things on their roadmap, but at the same time, their strategy is to connect Octane with visualization tools such as Power BI."
"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."
"The limitation of Octane is that we can't do a release outside of the sprint. We can only plan the release in the sprint. With Agile and JIRA tools, we can plan the release outside the sprint and do a global release of all the projects from the sprint."
"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 solution"
"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."
Microsoft Azure DevOps is ranked 1st in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 124 reviews while OpenText ALM Octane is ranked 5th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 38 reviews. Microsoft Azure DevOps is rated 8.2, while OpenText ALM Octane is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Microsoft Azure DevOps writes "Good support, helpful management capabilities, and great Kanban boards". On the other hand, 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". Microsoft Azure DevOps is most compared with GitLab, Jira, TFS, Rally Software and Octopus Deploy, whereas OpenText ALM Octane is most compared with Jira, OpenText ALM / Quality Center, Rally Software, GitLab and Codebeamer. See our Microsoft Azure DevOps vs. OpenText ALM Octane report.
See our list of best Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites vendors and best Enterprise Agile Planning Tools 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.
Sadly, I have no experience with Micro Focus ALM, however, such facts may well hint at the answer to your question. By contrast, Azure DevOps has gained an incredible following, based on accelerating solid reputation, leaving many competitors behind. Also, as has often been stated, "No one ever got fired for buying Microsoft." That said, there are fact-based comparisons, which actually rate Azure DevOps higher (e.g., www.trustradius.com).