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:
"The initial setup of this solution was straightforward, and there were not too many problems with it."
"You can see the work ticket and you can circulate that within the teams. You can define your flows, customize according to your needs, and you can create dashboards and create the reports according to your needs."
"We had a nice experience with technical support."
"It meets with everybody's needs without having to grab plugins."
"The technical support is quite good."
"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."
"The interface for this solution needs to be made more user-friendly to provide a better user experience."
"The most important thing for them to improve should be platform-independent features. They should also provide extensive pipelines and release pipelines that we can define and we can work on."
"The ease-of-use could be improved a little."
"Technical support needs some improvement."
"The configuration aspect of the solution is not easy. A person needs a lot of programming knowledge in order to successfully handle the job."
"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."
"The license model is okay for large companies but would be quite expensive for smaller enterprises."
"If the pricing would come down and it was more affordable then we wouldn't have to switch."
"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."
The world’s first 100% browser-based ALM enterprise solution, which enables seamless collaboration across disparate teams, multi-directionally linked work items, full traceability, accelerated productivity and automated proof of compliance.
Polarion ALM is ranked 8th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 5 reviews while TFS is ranked 5th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 14 reviews. Polarion ALM is rated 7.0, while TFS is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Polarion ALM writes "The amount of document control, combined with review and release probabilities and signatures is really useful". On the other hand, the top reviewer of TFS writes "Good project management features improve discipline and productivity in our application development lifecycle". Polarion ALM is most compared with Jira, PTC Integrity, Microsoft Azure DevOps, codeBeamer ALM and Atlassian ALM, whereas TFS is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, Jira, Rally Software, Micro Focus ALM Quality Center and Adaptavist Test Management for Jira. See our Polarion ALM vs. TFS 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.