OpenText ALM / Quality Center vs OpenText Silk Central comparison

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

We performed a comparison between OpenText ALM / Quality Center and OpenText Silk Central based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText, Microsoft, IDERA and others in Test Management Tools.
To learn more, read our detailed Test Management Tools Report (Updated: March 2024).
765,386 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
"Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is quite stable.""By standardizing our template, we publish reports at the business unit level.""The product can scale.""The stability is very good.""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.""The ability to integrate this solution with other applications is helpful. If there is automation, it comes with improved quality and speed.""The enhanced dashboards capabilities are useful for senior management to view the progress of releases under the portfolio in one go and also drill down to the graphs.""ALM Quality Center's best features are the test lab, requirement tab, and report dashboard."

More OpenText ALM / Quality Center Pros →

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

More OpenText Silk Central Pros →

Cons
"An area for improvement in Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is not being able to update the Excel sheet where I wrote the test cases. Whenever I update some test cases, I'm unsuccessful because there is overlapping data or missing cases from the sheet.""ALM requires that you install client side components. If your organization does not allow admin rights on your local machine, this means you will need someone to run the installation for you with admin rights. This client side install is also limited to Internet Explorer and does not support any other browsers.""Lacks sufficient plug-ins.""The session timeout time needs to be longer in my opinion.""We are looking for more automation capabilities.""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.""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.""We operate in Sweden, and there are not so many Swedish people that know the product."

More OpenText ALM / Quality Center Cons →

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

More OpenText Silk Central Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "I'd rate the pricing as 3/10 as it's very expensive."
  • "If you have more than five users, a concurrent licensing model should be considered."
  • "For pricing, I recommend to buy a bundled package. Check the HPE site for more details."
  • "The full ALM license lets you use the requirements tab, along with test automation and the Performance Center. You can also just buy the Quality Center edition (Manual testing only), or the Performance Center version (Performance Testing only)."
  • "HPE has one of the most rigid, inflexible, and super expensive license models."
  • "Sure, HP UFT is not free. But consider what you get for that cost: A stable product that is easy to use; the kitchen sink of technology stack support; decades of code (which in many cases actually is free); a version that is a stepping stone to an easier Selenium design; and a support base that is more that just the kindness of strangers."
  • "Seat and concurrent licensing models exist; the latter is recommended if a large number of different users will be utilizing the product."
  • "I feel that the licenses are expensive. ​"
  • More OpenText ALM / Quality Center Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "The cost of this tool, in terms of licensing, is not large."
  • More OpenText Silk Central Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Test Management Tools solutions are best for your needs.
    765,386 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:HP ALM and Jira can be easily integrated with the aid of a third-party Integration Solution To help you select the right integration approach and tool, you should first define your integration… more »
    Top Answer:The most valuable feature is the ST Add-In. It's a Microsoft add-in that makes it much easier to upload test cases into Quality Center.
    Top Answer:It was expensive for us. For the first two weeks, we had to employ people now and then as the system needed to be more accurate. It cost us a lot of money. I rate the solution's pricing as a seven or… more »
    Ask a question

    Earn 20 points

    Ranking
    1st
    Views
    3,859
    Comparisons
    1,683
    Reviews
    17
    Average Words per Review
    424
    Rating
    7.4
    20th
    Views
    331
    Comparisons
    226
    Reviews
    0
    Average Words per Review
    0
    Rating
    N/A
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Micro Focus ALM Quality Center, HPE ALM, Quality Center, Quality Center, Micro Focus ALM
    Micro Focus Silk Central, Borland Silk Central, Silk Central
    Learn More
    Overview
    OpenText ALM/Quality Center serves as the single pane of glass for software quality management. It helps you govern application lifecycle management activities and implement rigorous, auditable lifecycle processes.
    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.
    Sample Customers
    Airbus Defense and Space, Vodafone, JTI, Xellia, and Banco de Creìdito e Inversiones (Bci)
    AmBank Group, Krung Thai Computer Services, Deakin University
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm21%
    Comms Service Provider13%
    Insurance Company9%
    Healthcare Company8%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Educational Organization53%
    Financial Services Firm9%
    Computer Software Company6%
    Manufacturing Company5%
    REVIEWERS
    Computer Software Company25%
    Financial Services Firm25%
    Transportation Company25%
    Manufacturing Company13%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business16%
    Midsize Enterprise14%
    Large Enterprise70%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business7%
    Midsize Enterprise57%
    Large Enterprise37%
    REVIEWERS
    Midsize Enterprise30%
    Large Enterprise70%
    Buyer's Guide
    Test Management Tools
    March 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText, Microsoft, IDERA and others in Test Management Tools. Updated: March 2024.
    765,386 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    OpenText ALM / Quality Center is ranked 1st in Test Management Tools with 197 reviews while OpenText Silk Central is ranked 20th in Test Management Tools. OpenText ALM / Quality Center is rated 8.0, while OpenText Silk Central is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of OpenText ALM / Quality Center writes "Offers features for higher-end traceability and integration with different tools but lacks in scalability ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText Silk Central writes "We have many possibilities to customize the utilization and we can also work easily at database level for custom reporting and to manage additional information and integration". OpenText ALM / Quality Center is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, OpenText ALM Octane, Jira, Tricentis qTest and Zephyr Enterprise, whereas OpenText Silk Central is most compared with Zephyr Enterprise and TestRail.

    See our list of best Test Management Tools vendors.

    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.