We performed a comparison between OpenText ALM / Quality Center and Panaya Test Dynamix based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText, Microsoft, IDERA and others in Test Management Tools."I like that it integrates with the Jira solutions."
"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."
"Lab Management is a valuable feature, because you have a 360 view."
"The stability is very good."
"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."
"Defect management is very good."
"The most valuable feature of Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is the alignment of the test to the execution and the linking of the defects to the two. It automatically links any issues you have to the test."
"I personally found the defect tracking feature very useful in my ongoing project."
"The test repository to follow the test progress is most valuable because we can easily create and manage a huge number of test scripts. We can copy and paste, replicate, and drag and drop many tests scripts. We can create test scripts en masse. When you have a high volume of tests, the tool is quite useful. It works well when you want to manage a lot of tests, such as you have 1,000 or more test scripts."
"It is easy for business users to use who are not familiar with testing tools."
"Test migration from HPE are done automatically. We can extract our tests from HPE, and they convert it into the Panaya format."
"The solution helps with recording and documentation."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to copy the scenarios and as we do a rollout we can efficiently complete test three and put it somewhere else under a new subsidiary."
"The initial setup was not complex and the product itself is very easy to configure and use."
"Provides better monitoring for testing campaigns and business process testing."
"Defect ageing reports need to be included as built-in."
"Browser support needs improvement. Currently, it can only run on IE, Internet Explorer. It doesn't work on Firefox, doesn't work on Chrome, doesn't work on a Mac book. Those are the new technologies where most companies move towards. That's been outstanding for quite a while before it even became Micro Focus tools when it was still HP. Even before HP, that's always been an issue."
"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."
"Micro Focus is an expensive tool."
"The QA needs improvement."
"Requirements management could be improved as the use is very limited. E.g., they have always stated that, "You can monitor and create requirements," but it has its limitations. That's why companies will choose another requirements management solution and import data from that source system into Quality Center. Micro Focus has also invested in an adapter between Dimensions RM and ALM via Micro Focus Connect. However, I see room for improvements in this rather outdated tool. I feel what Micro Focus did is say, "Our strategy is not to improve these parts within the tool itself, but search for supported integrations within our own tool set." This has not been helpful."
"We operate in Sweden, and there are not so many Swedish people that know the product."
"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."
"It would be nice to be able to test offline. What I mean by that is today most of the time things are in the cloud, but sometimes when we are in factories and we do not have network access and we should be able to download a test script into our PCs and do the test offline. Once that is complete we can re-upload it when we have a network connection."
"They provide options for custom fields or tabs, but customization of workflows would be great."
"Support is reactive and in English only."
"The setup of Panaya Recorder is a bit complex. Panaya is a SaaS application, but you need to install some components on your computer. You need to set up your computer to allow Panaya Recorder to work. There are five or six things to do each time you install Panaya for any user. If you miss something, Panaya Recorder doesn't work. So, it is complex to install."
"Nothing is automatic."
More OpenText ALM / Quality Center Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText ALM / Quality Center is ranked 1st in Test Management Tools with 197 reviews while Panaya Test Dynamix is ranked 11th in Test Management Tools with 5 reviews. OpenText ALM / Quality Center is rated 8.0, while Panaya Test Dynamix is rated 8.4. 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 Panaya Test Dynamix writes "More than reliable, with satisfied results for our needs, and excellent testing options". OpenText ALM / Quality Center is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, OpenText ALM Octane, Jira, Tricentis qTest and Zephyr Enterprise, whereas Panaya Test Dynamix is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Tricentis qTest, Worksoft Certify, Zephyr Enterprise and OpenText UFT One.
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.
