We performed a comparison between OpenText ALM / Quality Center and Worksoft Certify based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Atlassian, Nutanix and others in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites."The product can scale."
"As a stand-alone test management tool, it's a good tool."
"Most of the features that I like the best are more on the analytics side."
"What's most valuable in Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is that it's useful for these activities: test designing, test planning, and test execution."
"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."
"Defect management is very good."
"Integration with other HPE products."
"The execution module and the test planning module are definitely the most valuable features. The rest we use for traceability, but those are the two modules that I cannot live without."
"We love the Capture 2.0 feature. It seems to work very well."
"We were able to use Worksoft to automate all of the actions that we would have to take after an SAP refresh. This way we do the refresh, then that night or right afterwards, we run the Worksoft script and it resets all of our testing users. This sets them up with the right access, the right approvals, and just sets up everything on the back-end so we can do our scripts the next night."
"It provides a lot of time savings. We are always ready to execute a task whenever the business asks us. We saved approximately 7000 hours in 2018."
"It is highly scalable and reusable. It is easy for team members to maintain and use with confidence. There is great versatility."
"The biggest feature is the fact that it's codeless. It takes away the problem of finding people with the correct programming language, since there are multiple such languages. It saves time in introducing people to the solution because they don't need programming knowledge, they just need to be able to think logically. This makes it vastly usable by more people who are not even acquainted with IT at all."
"Certify integrates with other tools and it works very well with other machine testing applications."
"One of the bigger value-adds that we had was extracting data from our warning systems to be inputted into our new learning system."
"A specific feature that I found to be the most valuable in the solution for our company's work processes stems from the fact that it is useful as a low-code automation tool."
"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."
"It is pricey."
"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."
"Certain features are lousy. Those features can drag the whole server down. There are times that the complex SQL queries are not easy to do within this solution."
"There is room for improvement in the scalability and stability of the solution."
"Only Internet Explorer is supported. That is a big problem. They don't support Chrome and Firefox and so on."
"There's room for improvement on the reporting side of things and the scheduling, in general, is a bit clunky."
"We are looking for more automation capabilities."
"We're really hopeful for the mobile testing in Worksoft Certify going forward."
"When it comes to mobile testing, we have a small bottleneck there. You have to buy third-party separate licenses if you want to test on a mobile. Business wise we see room for improvement there, although it's that really critical for us."
"Performance on the web UI part, especially with some of the more comprehensive Fiori features, like the complex tables that are being used, could be improved. In those cases we have noticed a lot of execution-time increase with regards to the Certify solution."
"Our interactions with technical support has not been the best always and there is room for improvement especially with respect to the time taken to respond to cases. However, with the right contacts and reasonable escalations we have always managed to get quick attention on our cases."
"An area that I would like to see improved is how the permissions are applied. If you're applying permissions groups to a user, one of the options is to delete the group entirely and lose the entire permission group, rather than just deleting the permission from the user, which seems a little silly. In my opinion, that whole module of permissions is very confusing and lends itself to common errors."
"I would like BPP to have more filtering options during the report creation. This would make our customers happy."
"They have a scheduler in Execution Manager, but it is not customizable. Its UI needs a lot of improvement. The lights-out testing is a bit difficult with that particular tool, and it needs a lot of improvement. Of course, there are so many integration options with Worksoft for execution, but when it comes to Execution Manager, which is their own tool, there is a lot of scope for improvement."
"I would like Worksoft Certify to do automation at any layer (the UI layer, API layer, or database layer) and challenge competitors in the RPA industry, like UiPath and Automation Anywhere."
More OpenText ALM / Quality Center Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText ALM / Quality Center is ranked 6th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 197 reviews while Worksoft Certify is ranked 5th in Test Automation Tools with 64 reviews. OpenText ALM / Quality Center is rated 8.0, while Worksoft Certify 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 Worksoft Certify writes "Enables us to automate end-to-end testing of our integration between S/4HANA and Salesforce.com". OpenText ALM / Quality Center is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, OpenText ALM Octane, Jira, Tricentis qTest and Zephyr Enterprise, whereas Worksoft Certify is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Selenium HQ, OpenText UFT One, Katalon Studio and Panaya Test Dynamix.
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.
