We performed a comparison between Micro Focus ALM Quality Center and Microsoft Azure Devops based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Azure DevOps is the winner in this comparison. According to reviews, Azure Devops is a powerful solution that is easier to set up, and less expensive than Quality Center.
"Most of the features are very valuable for us, especially the source code control and task management."
"What I like the most is the DevOps Boards. It's easy to create a hierarchical project structure, assign tasks to people, and to track their tasks."
"DevOps is easy to use because we can arrange each task in a project and follow up with the testing, development, and business teams. We manage everything through this."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is task management."
"This platform provides a large span of tools and technologies."
"The most valuable feature is that it brings order to our projects, and we know the status of each one at every moment."
"Setting up Azure DevOps was straightforward. It's easy to use the default templates. Everything is under our control, so it's simple to implement new requirements."
"One of the main features is the user interface is very good."
"Lab Management is a valuable feature, because you have a 360 view."
"It has a good response time."
"ALM Quality Center's best features are the test lab, requirement tab, and report dashboard."
"It is stable and reliable."
"Within Quality Center, you have the dashboard where you can monitor your progress over different entities. You can build your own SQL query segments, and all that data is there in the system, then you can make a dashboard report."
"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 tools could be useful if we were utilizing them more effectively"
"ALM Quality Center is a reliable, consolidated product."
"There are some areas that need improvement such as tracking."
"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."
"One thing I would note is that it's hard to know what is included or not in the product. Especially when you begin to try and compare it to other solutions. When you go to a site like VersionOne, they tell you Azure DevOps doesn't have this or that, and when you go to Microsoft, it says VersionOne doesn't have this or that. They could do a better job of laying out exactly what is on offer so customers know going in exactly what they'll get."
"The user management in the solution could improve."
"The ability to integrate Microsoft Azure DevOps with other platforms and Microsoft products can be improved."
"Some things like project management, tasks, progress, and having work progress views require us to use some external tools, or to create our own internal tools. These are not native to DevOps. It would be ideal if, instead of searching for third-party solutions, they had these feature sets or capabilities included under DevOps."
"I would like to automate notifications on sprint planning. When we are getting to the end of sprint planning, we would be automatically notified."
"We are facing a lot of issues in the development of containerized solutions. We are facing a lot of challenges in this area. They could make the process simpler."
"We have had a poor experience with customer service and support."
"The session timeout time needs to be longer in my opinion."
"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."
"The product is good, it's great, but when compared to other products with the latest methodologies, or when rating it as a software development tool, then I'll have to rate it with a lower score because there's a lot of other great tools where you can interconnect them, use them, scale them, and leverage. It all depends on the cost."
"Is not very user-friendly."
"It is pricey."
"Cross project reporting is limited to similar database schemas"
"Defect ageing reports need to be included as built-in."
More OpenText ALM / Quality Center Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Azure DevOps is ranked 1st in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 124 reviews while OpenText ALM / Quality Center is ranked 6th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 197 reviews. Microsoft Azure DevOps is rated 8.2, while OpenText ALM / Quality Center is rated 8.0. 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 / Quality Center writes "Offers features for higher-end traceability and integration with different tools but lacks in scalability ". Microsoft Azure DevOps is most compared with GitLab, Jira, TFS, Rally Software and Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, whereas OpenText ALM / Quality Center is most compared with OpenText ALM Octane, Jira, Tricentis qTest, Zephyr Enterprise and OpenText UFT One. See our Microsoft Azure DevOps vs. OpenText ALM / Quality Center report.
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.
