Anonymous UserPerformance and Automation Testing Squad Lead at a financial services firm
Anonymous UserAsst. Vice president, Applications Architecture at a tech services company
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"By using QC we broke down silos (of teams), improved the organization of our tests, have a much better view of the testing status, and became much quicker in providing test results with document generation."
"Ability to customize modules, particularly Defect Tracking module on company specific needs"
"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 like the Kanban board. It is very useful in terms of seeing who is working on what and what the current status of work is."
"I like the build management features and the integration with Jenkins and many other tools."
"This solution enables us to link all items usefully, in the way we use Agile."
"The most valuable features are the dashboard and task-selection capability."
"The interface is easy to navigate."
"The most valuable feature is the backlog."
"Good branching and labelling features."
"The most valuable feature is simplicity."
"We would like to have support for agile development."
"The BPT also known as Business Process Testing can sometimes be very time intensive and sometimes might not be very intuitive to someone who is not familiar with BPT."
"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."
"In the next release, I would like them to include integration for various projects, similar to what JIRA has, and they could create this feature on the dashboard."
"One of the areas that could be improved is to have an effective full lifecycle management."
"The test management interface is not very handy."
"The interface can be improved and made more user-friendly."
"I would like to see the reporting features expanded so that I can see details on the users connected to all of the projects."
"The program and portfolio planning facility can be improved."
"Integration from Visual Studio could be improved."
"They should have design patterns in TFS for the development team, and design patterns for the QA."
"Quality Center is pricey, but cheaper is not always less expensive."
"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."
"The pricing is reasonable at this time."
"TFS is more competitively priced than some other solutions."
"We pay subscription fees on a yearly basis and the price is reasonable."
"I wouldn't say that this tool is cheap or expensive but in the middle."
"We are using the open-source version."
Earn 20 points
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.
Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is ranked 3rd in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 24 reviews while TFS is ranked 5th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 14 reviews. Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is rated 7.6, while TFS is rated 7.8. 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 TFS writes "Good project management features improve discipline and productivity in our application development lifecycle". Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is most compared with Micro Focus ALM Octane, Jira, Microsoft Azure DevOps, Tricentis qTest and Zephyr Enterprise, whereas TFS is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, Jira, Rally Software, TestRail by Gurock and Visual Studio Test Professional. See our Micro Focus ALM Quality Center vs. TFS report.
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.