Compare Micro Focus ALM Quality Center vs. Silk Test

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Atlassian, Microsoft, Micro Focus and others in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites. Updated: July 2021.
523,431 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 makes work visible, so everybody knows where everything is. It uses Kanban, and that makes work visible.""We use the board and card hierarchies in terms of sprints so that we can see if we have cross-functional teams that are working on the same projects together, especially when projects have dependencies. The parent-child relationship within cards is really nice so that we can see what kind of dependencies there are when we're trying to get projects finished.""My team specifically uses our board for all of our Remedy tickets that come in. We had a card for every ticket that we get, and we're able to add the link to that specific ticket there.If I'm out of office, for example, and someone else needs to work a ticket or someone is being contacted to work on a ticket, I don't have to sign on it. Someone else can easily access that ticket because I put the link in there. It's nice. It has a lot of great functionality in there.""Using the tool seems to save time versus trying to do things in a regular manner. It is highly collaborative; everybody can see things in one place. It is a highly functional, but pretty simple tool. That is hard to find: A tool that has a lot of functions, but is also simple."

More Planview LeanKit Pros »

"We can get an entire project into a single repository where we can view all the data in detail. This is where we keep all our test cases where everyone can reference them. This provides everyone access to the test cases and artifacts via the cloud. There is no need to contact anyone.""The best thing is that you can see your current status in real time... To see real-time updates, you just log in to ALM and you can see exactly what the progress is. You can also see if the plan for the day is being executed properly, and it's all tracked. From the management side, I find those features very valuable.""The test-case repository and linkage through to regression requirements will absolutely be a key component for us. We haven't got it yet, but when we've got an enterprise regression suite, that will be a key deliverable for them. We will be able to have all of the regression suite in one place, linked to the right requirements.""It's easy to create defects and easy to sync them up with a developer. Immediately, once created, it will trigger an email to the developer and we'll start a conversation with the developer regarding the requirements that have not been matched.""Reporting was the main thing because, at my level, I was looking for a picture of exactly what the coverage was, which areas were tested, and where the gaps were. The reporting also allowed me to see test planning and test cases across the landscape.""I love to use this solution with single projects. It has helped our productivity. With the metrics that I receive, I can put them onto the management model so I can see them there. It has reduced our time for project management and controls by 20 percent.""I love linking/associating the requirements to a test case. That's where I get to know my requirement coverage, which helps a lot at a practical level. So, we use the traceability and visibility features a lot. This helps us to understand if there are any requirements not linked to any test case, thus not getting tested at all. That missing link is always very visible, which helps us to create our requirement traceability matrix and maintain it in a dynamic way. Even with changing requirements, we can keep on changing or updating the tool.""With test execution, you have an option to create custom fields. It is also really user-friendly. With other tools, we only have restricted fields and we cannot customize or add new columns or fields that users can make use of while testing. ALM is very flexible for creating new fields. It is easy for users to understand the application."

More Micro Focus ALM Quality Center Pros »

"The ability to develop scripts in Visual Studio, Visual Studio integration, is the most valuable feature.""The feature I like most is the ease of reporting.""The statistics that are available are very good.""The scalability of the solution is quite good. You can easily expand the product if you need to.""The major thing it has helped with is to reduce the workload on testing activities.""Scripting is the most valuable. We are able to record and then go in and modify the script that it creates. It has a lot of generative scripts."

More Silk Test Pros »

Cons
"I do not know what it can do in the area of scrum. Maybe it has that functionality. I have never tried to set it up. You think of LeanKit from the perspective of Kanban. I don't know if there is a template for scrum, a scaled agile framework, or any of those scaling frameworks.""Being able to track actual time on cards or sprints, instead of using just the planned start and stop date, would also be useful. I would like to see something like JIRA has with actual sprint starts and stops.""The ability to report on customizable fields and third-party extensions needs improvement. I'd like to see more of those being able to be used. I don't know how that works for Planview, but just getting a little bit more added there would be nice.""The integration with the Enterprise One product is probably an area for improvement. It's not really broken. It's just that it is such a handy tool and a great way to visually manage things. There is a very limited hookup/integration between Enterprise One, which is the master Planview tool, and LeanKit. While they are looking at this on their roadmap, it definitely needs to happen. There is a lot of opportunity there."

More Planview LeanKit Cons »

"The version of Micro Focus ALM that we use only works through Internet Explorer (IE). We have to communicate to everyone that they can only use IE with the solution. This is a big limitation. We should be free to use any type of browser or operating system. We have customers and partners who are unable to log into the system and enter their defects because they work on a different operating system.""ALM only works on Internet Explorer. It doesn't work on any other browser. In my opinion, Internet Explorer is generally a bit slower. I would like to see it work on Chrome or on other browsers.""There's room for improvement on the reporting side of things and the scheduling, in general, is a bit clunky.""One drawback is that ALM only launches with the IE browser. It is not supporting the latest in Chrome... It should be launched for all of the latest browsers.""When it came to JIRA and Agile adoption, that was not really easy to do with ALM. I tried, but I was not able to do much on that... There is room for improvement in the way it connects to and handles Agile projects.""Quality Center's ability to connect all the different projects to reflect status and progress is quite complicated. We may develop something because there are so many projects. Right now, I have to do something which Quality Center is really not designed for: over reporting. This is a very big problem right now. We may develop some controls, but it is problem at the moment. I love Quality Center for individual projects to work with it. However, if you have a lot of projects for Quality Manager to do cross reporting on many projects, then it's almost impossible. It takes a lot of time.""Sometimes I do run my queries from the admin login. However, if I want to reassess all my test cases, then I am still doing this in a manual manner. I write SQL queries, then fire them off. Therefore, a library of those SQL queries would help. If we could have a typical SQL query to change the parameters within test cases, then this is one aspect I can still think that could be included in ALM. Though they would need to be analyzed and used in a very knowledgeable way.""We cannot rearrange the Grid in the Test Lab. It is in alphabetical order right now. But sometimes a user will want to see, for example, the X column next to the B column. If they came out with that it would be useful for us. They are working on that, as we have raised that request with Micro Focus."

More Micro Focus ALM Quality Center Cons »

"They should extend some of the functions that are a bit clunky and improve the integration.""The pricing is an issue, the program is very expensive. That is something that can improve.""Everything is very manual. It's up to us to find out exactly what the issues are.""The solution has a lack of compatibility with newer technologies.""The support for automation with iOS applications can be better.""We moved to Ranorex because the solution did not easily scale, and we could not find good and short term third-party help. We needed to have a bigger pool of third-party contractors that we could draw on for specific implementations. Silk didn't have that, and we found what we needed for Ranorex here in the Houston area. It would be good if there is more community support. I don't know if Silk runs a user conference once a year and how they set up partners. We need to be able to talk to somebody more than just on the phone. It really comes right down to that. The generated automated script was highly dependent upon screen position and other keys that were not as robust as we wanted. We found the automated script generated by Ranorex and the other key information about a specific data point to be more robust. It handled the transition better when we moved from computer to computer and from one size of the application to the other size. When we restarted Silk, we typically had to recalibrate screen elements within the script. Ranorex also has some of these same issues, but when we restart, it typically is faster, which is important."

More Silk Test Cons »

Pricing and Cost Advice
"In general, Planview's cost structure is reasonable. You get quite a lot of functionality for the license cost that you get."

More Planview LeanKit Pricing and Cost Advice »

"Compared to the market, the price is high.""Pricing is managed by our headquarters. I am able to get from them for very cheap. The market price is horribly expensive.""It all comes down to how many people are going to access the tool. When teams go above 20, I think ALM is a better tool to use from a collaboration and streamlining perspective.""Depending on the volume, the annual maintenance costs vary on a percentage but it's around $300 a year per license for maintenance. It's at 18% of the total cost of the license.""The solution has the ability to handle a large number of projects and users in an enterprise environment with the correct license.""Most vendors offer the same pricing, though some vendors offer a cheaper price for their cloud/SaaS solution versus their on-premise. However, cloud/SaaS solutions result in a loss of freedom. E.g., if you want to make a change, most of the time it needs to be validated by the vendor, then you're being charged an addition fee. Sometimes, even if you are rejected, you are charged because it's a risk to the entire environment.""I don't know the exact numbers, but I know it is pricey. When we talked to the sales reps we work with from our company, they say, "Well, Micro Focus will never lose on price." So, they are willing to do a lot of negotiating if it is required.""Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is very expensive."

More Micro Focus ALM Quality Center Pricing and Cost Advice »

"Our licensing fees are on a yearly basis, and while I think that the price is quite reasonable I am not allowed to share those details.""We paid annually. There is a purchase cost, and then there is an ongoing maintenance fee."

More Silk Test Pricing and Cost Advice »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions are best for your needs.
523,431 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Questions from the Community
Top Answer: Using the tool seems to save time versus trying to do things in a regular manner. It is highly collaborative; everybody… more »
Top Answer: The integration with the Enterprise One product is probably an area for improvement. It's not really broken. It's just… more »
Top Answer: We have a unique use case. Normally, people use LeanKit to track agile development in IT. However, we use the product to… more »
Top Answer: The licensing model is an area that can be improved. The cost of licensing depends on the number of VMs that you are… more »
Top Answer: We are having a lot of problems with this solution. One example is that users are able to run test cases, but the… more »
Top Answer: Scripting is the most valuable. We are able to record and then go in and modify the script that it creates. It has a lot… more »
Top Answer: We paid annually. There is a purchase cost, and then there is an ongoing maintenance fee.
Top Answer: We moved to Ranorex because the solution did not easily scale, and we could not find good and short term third-party… more »
Popular Comparisons
Also Known As
LeanKit
HPE ALM, Quality Center, Quality Center, Micro Focus ALM
Segue, SilkTest, Micro Focus Silk Test
Learn More
Overview

Planview LeanKit enables engineering teams across all levels of the organization with a visual work delivery tool to apply Lean management principles to their work, helping them work smarter and deliver faster.

Micro Focus Application Lifecycle Management software (ALM), is a unified platform that helps teams prioritize, align and focus their project activities, provides actionable insight, and fosters the re-use of assets from requirements through development, testing, and readiness for delivery. 

Built on best practices, an extensible architecture and centralized repository, Micro Focus ALM is one of the first unified, technology-agnostic application management systems available now; integrating out-of-the-box with over 30 open source and competitive industry products.

Micro Focus’s ALM suite provides flexible solutions and deployment options to meet your needs and scale with you as you grow.

SilkTest is robust and portable test automation for web, native, and enterprise software applications. Silk Test's portability enables users to test applications more effectively with lower complexity and cost in comparison to other functional testing tools on the market. Silk Test's role based testing enables business stakeholders, QA engineers, and developers to contribute to the whole automation testing process, which drives collaboration and increases the effectiveness of software testing.
Offer
Learn more about Planview LeanKit
Learn more about Micro Focus ALM Quality Center
Learn more about Silk Test
Sample Customers
REA Group, Thompson Reuters
Specsavers, Cardinal Health, KMD, Turkcell
Krung Thai Computer Services, Quality Kiosk, Mªller, AVG Technologies
Top Industries
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company24%
Comms Service Provider15%
Financial Services Firm9%
Government9%
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm20%
Comms Service Provider13%
Healthcare Company10%
Insurance Company9%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company34%
Comms Service Provider13%
Financial Services Firm10%
Government6%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company35%
Comms Service Provider14%
Financial Services Firm13%
Insurance Company5%
Company Size
No Data Available
REVIEWERS
Small Business14%
Midsize Enterprise14%
Large Enterprise72%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business6%
Midsize Enterprise17%
Large Enterprise77%
REVIEWERS
Small Business21%
Midsize Enterprise21%
Large Enterprise57%
Find out what your peers are saying about Atlassian, Microsoft, Micro Focus and others in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites. Updated: July 2021.
523,431 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is ranked 3rd in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 24 reviews while Silk Test is ranked 11th in Functional Testing Tools with 6 reviews. Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is rated 7.4, while Silk Test is rated 7.0. The top reviewer of Micro Focus ALM Quality Center writes "Makes it easy to go back and execute the same test every time with automation". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Silk Test writes "An easy to use interface with a recording feature that our business users are happy with". Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is most compared with Micro Focus ALM Octane, Jira, Microsoft Azure DevOps, Tricentis qTest and TFS, whereas Silk Test is most compared with Micro Focus UFT One, Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional, Selenium HQ, Apache JMeter and Tricentis Tosca.

See our list of .

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.