We just raised a $30M Series A: Read our story

IBM Rational ALM Competitors and Alternatives

Get our free report covering Microsoft, Atlassian, PTC, and other competitors of IBM Rational ALM. Updated: September 2021.
542,267 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Read reviews of IBM Rational ALM competitors and alternatives

BJ
Process Owner E/E Test Management at a transportation company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 20
Reporting engine, widgets, and dashboards are a huge plus, and powerful REST interface means we can interact with other tools

Pros and Cons

  • "The key feature is the usability. It is fast to learn and easy to use. It's very intuitive to work with. Most of the important functions are available via a few clicks, compared to other tools where I have to open a sub-menu and then a sub-menu and another sub-menu, and then press a button."
  • "The elements in filtering need to be improved, meaning the number of filters I can use in widgets or in the grid views in parallel. There's a limitation which bothers a lot of our users. Filtering in text, or having a complex filter is limited. In a given field, for example, I can use a filter only once. I cannot say, 'Include the values 1, 2, and 3, and exclude value 17.' This is not possible but we have requested it often."

What is our primary use case?

We are using ALM Octane for electronic component testing and validation. We have a few departments where they are developing their software and using JIRA projects and exchanging results with Octane. 

About 80 percent of the users are not in software development itself, but are in software testing. The software is developed by external companies and we are just doing the integration testing. We are putting the components together from five different suppliers, and then doing the integration testing. Is the software working in real life, together, from the different control units of different vendors? It is a staged process. We check if things are working in the different parts of the system, like the engine components, drive train, navigation, and infotainment systems. If things are working in those different areas, we put everything together and test it in a complete car.

As a result, we have lots of test cases. We have automated tests and a test automation tool that is controlling complete car-wrecks and the like. So it's not only a mouse pointer on a screen. It's controlling robots opening and closing doors, for example. 

Our main focus is efficient planning of tests. We cannot run all the tests we have every single week, because lots of the stuff has different variants for Europe and the U.S. and China. So we have to have very sophisticated test planning. A lot of attributes are needed for this and for all the runs, whether manual or automated. We have what we call a very large problem management process to work on the defects with the 100-plus suppliers that are delivering different control units and, therefore, software packages.

How has it helped my organization?

We use Octane's Backlog and Team Backlog capabilities a lot. For example, we use them for errors that occur in software that we are not developing ourselves, where we are just doing the integration testing. In such cases we are using user stories to order teams to test a certain number of test suites or test cases. We can use it straight away, out-of-the-box, without breaking or adding something to the tool. Using Team Backlogs means our teams can use all the features that come with Octane, for our benefit, without doing anything else. In the past, if you compare it to the old ALM solution, lots of teams had to store their tests and results in ALM.Net and use JIRA as a parallel system. They were manually copying and pasting links into both tools to control their workloads. Users were used to working with user stories as a work order, and that is now integrated in one tool, which is a huge benefit.

It has also reduced our testing costs. I don't have the numbers, but we're speeding up a lot. Just the waiting time we had with the old ALM when logging in was about one minute. If you multiply this by 5,000 users who are logging in on a single day you can calculate very large savings, very fast.

What is most valuable?

The key feature is the usability. It is fast to learn and easy to use. It's very intuitive to work with. Most of the important functions are available via a few clicks, compared to other tools where I have to open a sub-menu and then a sub-menu and another sub-menu, and then press a button.

The native support for Waterfall, Hybrid, and Agile software development at enterprise scale was one of the reasons why we changed to Octane. In the development process we're creating the requirement specifications which are then handed out to a supplier, including Bosch, Continental, Alpine, etc. They then develop control units with software and we have to link our tests against those requirements to check if everything is implemented. This is a very important task. It's required by law. For example, for autonomous driving, we have to prove that the car is not, by default, running into trees. We are proving that by test cases that are passed. While that is still Waterfall, it's not Agile, we are using the Agile methodologies more and more to control our workload. For example, we are using a user story in test management to order teams to test a certain number of test cases.

In terms of integrations to proprietary, third-party, and open-source tools out-of-the-box, it has a very powerful REST interface. We can interact with other tools. Micro Focus also offers synchronization tools, Micro Focus Connect Core, which has out-of-the-box interfaces to industry standards tools. For everything else, you can use the powerful REST interface, which is both good and bad. It's good for creating an interface but sometimes our engineers use the REST interface to do things they should not do. But that's because engineers are always doing fancy stuff.

What needs improvement?

The elements in filtering need to be improved, meaning the number of filters I can use in widgets or in the grid views in parallel. There's a limitation which bothers a lot of our users. Filtering in text, or having a complex filter is limited. In a given field, for example, I can use a filter only once. I cannot say, "Include the values 1, 2, and 3, and exclude value 17." This is not possible but we have requested it often.

And in general, widgets should be more flexible and more sophisticated, with the ability to layer two different widgets. There is also room for improvement in the amount of test cases which are available for certain filter conditions and a given widget, versus what was worked off already.

Also, when it comes to getting reports out of it, and maybe this is a little bit specific to the automotive industry, there are certain requirements by law where we have to export the test results for the final software delivery and create PDF reports which are stored for 15 or 20 years. Creating reports in PDF, or PowerPoint which then become PDF at the end of the day, is something which could be improved a lot. We're working on it with Micro Focus in every single release as new features are added.

For how long have I used the solution?

We have been using ALM Octane on a production scale since the middle of 2018. We started digging into the different tools about one and a half years prior. At that point our idea was to change from ALM to whatever other tool. We decided to go with Octane in early or mid 2017.

We are trying to use the latest and greatest version. We are now updating to 15.0.60, the so-called "Beatles" release, because of one technical issue that we solved together with Micro Focus. But in two to three months we will be on the latest and greatest "Depeche Mode" version which will be 15.1.40.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It's stable, out-of-the-box, with very few errors. And if we get an error message, very often it's because of the complex rules we have implemented, ourselves, in Octane. But in general, the usage of Octane is very good, the quality is very high, with very few errors and bugs, and with high reliability even on a large scale. We are close to being the largest Octane instance for Micro Focus.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The scalability is pretty good. We did some load tests in advance, before making the decision, pro or con, on Octane. With Octane we are in a very good position. We expected to have some 5,000 users by the end of 2019/beginning of 2020 working on Octane. I believe it can go up to 2,000 users working in parallel. We hope to be powerful enough, with the architecture and everything else we set up, to meet users' expectations of performance.

We are involved in further step-by-step expansion of our use of Octane. For this year, we are planning to extend the native Octane usage of test automation, the DevOps module. We are introducing it and maybe we will be able to replace some home-grown and other tools and to integrate them into Octane to have the benefit of Octane. It would be helpful to have everything in one place for the monitoring and reporting possibilities. Our processes and needs are changing from time to time, and this is always reflected in the test management tool.

How are customer service and technical support?

I'm very proud of the opportunity that Micro Focus offered to our team, to be something of a design partner. We have a very strong relationship with R&D and are able to discuss user wishes and our needs directly with them. They listen very carefully and try to deliver solutions for our problems and enhancement requests. It is amazing to see how fast and how stably things come together, even if some users are complaining because their single feature request has been open for two years. But that's because we have more important ones. It's an awesome relationship.

You also have to take into consideration that Octane has become an industry standard. Lots of different companies are using it. From that point of view, you get to know how complex the work is for Micro Focus, and how valuable a good relationship is. I'm very thankful for being part of this kind of working together and improving the tool.

And it has often turned out that our requests and wishes have had a huge benefit for other customers.

The benefit of this design partnership, which is unique, is a plus for us. We are able to influence the tool and get features, especially within the timeline that we need them. That's one of the biggest advantages.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We knew we needed to go with Octane for a couple of reasons. From the business side, there were some requests which ALM could not cover, in terms of data storage, etc. Since we have so many test cases, and given how versioning and base-lining work in ALM, it would require so much storage that we were not using the versioning in ALM. This was one of the biggest pain points from an ISO perspective in terms of testing. Also, operation maintenance was hard. We were running the biggest ALM.NET instance in the world, according to Micro Focus. We had the most users, the most data, and the most complex VBA workflow code in a single instance of ALM. This needed to be migrated smoothly to Octane.

In addition, Internet Explorer, which is not the finest tool, was removed from our company's IT at the beginning of 2020. There were a lot of smaller reasons which lead to the need to change to a different tool, to a more flexible tool, to a more powerful tool. For example, the Autonomous Driving guys were going to be adding tons of test cases and automated tests, which would cause ALM, in the configuration we were in, to crash in the future. That was clear, and it was clear to our management as well. We only had a small time window to change to a different system.

How was the initial setup?

For us, it was a very complex setup. It was not only setting up a server, installing Octane, and doing configurations. Our plan was to have a shared Workspace concept with six or seven Workspaces. We did have a major challenge in doing all the configuration stuff, defining methods and processes. We also had to connect at least ten major tools or databases, which are synchronizing information into Octane, or which are used for the special methods of test planning and test automation; pulling information from Octane and running them on our test benches in semi-automated cars.

That was a very complex process.  There were some small problems and some bigger problems but we found solutions for all of them.

Because we have some 70 to 80 suppliers that are part of an automated defects exchange, our development, our testers, are reporting defects and those defects are exchanged with those 70 to 80 suppliers. So it's a very complex situation we are in.

Of course, users have to learn different things compared to ALM.Net, the old version of the tool. But we're getting good feedback from the users that as soon as they are used to the idea that they have to use a different tool, they are learning how to use it very fast.  There are fewer obstacles in the tool, in this regard, compared to others. Even if you're a JIRA user, you have to overcome that, "I have to use a different tool" issue. There are people who are doing this very easily and with a smile, while some are just trying to stick to the known tools. But that's the change process.

For deployment and maintenance of the tool, there was a major team of experienced IT guys and process guys from our side, about 25 people, supported by about 60 other people just for the special processes of the different development departments. We call them "key users." They are collecting information and reporting it to the core team. For maintenance, it's a team of six people who are implementing changes requested by the core team. Depending on the workload, on average, maintenance is done by three people. There were numerous software developers working on the interface tools, perhaps some 30 IT guys working on the different tools we needed to launch with Octane.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

I was not part of the cost negotiations. But the purchasing guys confirmed that Micro Focus offered the best pricing to us.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We started analyzing which tool we should use for the future a few years ago, and we started digging into Octane very early. 

Options we considered included JIRA, which is used by a lot of small teams. There is a standard toolchain around but with the amount of data and information we need to run, JIRA was very easy to strike from the list. We dug into IBM and PTC Integrity. We looked into ALM Octane vs codeBeamer ALM from Intland. We did some comparisons but ended up with Octane.

With JIRA and the toolchain, you cannot run a business like ours, doing car development, using a lot of plugins to get the needed functionality in one tool. You have so many small companies providing those plugins. What if the company providing one of the tools or plugins you're using collapses or doesn't support a new JIRA version? So this was not an option.

PTC is also using different tools to support the full functionality of requirements, test cases, team management, the backlogs, tests and defects, and so on.

codeBeamer was on the short-list and was the biggest competitor to Octane. But from our perspective, Octane did much better in performance. Octane is not able to do as many relations between the data objects as codeBeamer, but performance was the key factor for us. When you compare Octane to codeBeamer ALM, the UX concept is very good. What's also very important is to have good capabilities for getting reports about the system out of Octane in real time. The reporting engine, the widgets, and the dashboards are a huge plus.

This is still an area where we have lots of feature requests at Micro Focus to enhance things even further. We would like it to be more flexible for the users. We have lots of user-defined fields and lists so users are requesting more capabilities for enhancing this area or would like the possibility of filtering their work items.

We were setting the foundation for the next eight to ten years. We had to have that in mind, as well as the increase in data, the increase in users, the increase in data objects and rules, and the complexity of development which is divided into different pieces. To cover all this in one single tool led us to Octane. Cost and license fees were also a big issue. The two solutions, codeBeamer and Octane, weren't that far apart but, here as well, Octane was first.

What other advice do I have?

Do a quick scan of tools in the market and dig into your needs. Especially for a project with a lot of users with different styles of working together, Octane is the best tool because of the shared space/Workspace concept. Management is able to get a total overview of all the projects or workspaces and the teams are able to operate in their particular styles. That would be my advice.

For small teams, there might be different solutions that are cheaper, JIRA for example, and tools that are more flexible. But if you need to run bigger businesses, Octane is the best because it's replacing a whole toolchain.

The solution can provide a single platform for all automated testing but it's a little different for us because of our strong dependency on hardware, like robots, for automation. We need to have a robot that presses a button, for example, for real end-to-end testing. It depends on the types of errors you're working with. ALM Octane is integrated and fully supporting every task. But on some levels, because of our special needs, we have to work with third-party tools and we then use Octane as a single point of truth for all the results.

Integration of ALM Octane with your CI server is possible and we are working on that so that we can use the features of Octane and connect it to our different departments and solutions. The idea is to try to streamline things and make Octane the central tool for those use cases. Although it's possible already to do this, we have to use some workarounds because of our tools and the way we use the solution. It takes time until the central tools are supporting various processes and, in the meantime, people develop their own processes and their own little tools and they want to stick to their working solution and not start all over again. This is going on in different departments and different areas of the company. So if you then try to integrate all this in a single tool, at the end of the day, you are taking away their "toys" and their "babies" that they invented. So it's a work in progress. But it's possible and it is on our agenda for this year.

The solution hasn't reduced manual testing time in our organization yet, since we are just starting with the integration of our test automation and Octane to create a workflow and process where everything is integrated. This is something we are working on. The first step was to replace the old ALM for a certain number of user groups. We now have more than 7,200 users working in Octane, and we have more than 1,000 concurrent users working in it. It takes time to develop this. But the goal for this year is to integrate it and to use it more and more efficiently. And then it will definitely reduce automated and manual work.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: IT Central Station contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
Flag as inappropriate
Jorge Ambrosio
Quality Management Office (QMO) Manager at a comms service provider with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 5Leaderboard
Great technical support with excellent integration and a fairly easy initial setup

Pros and Cons

  • "The solution is fast and very accessible."
  • "It would be great if they worked more closely with other solutions. There needs to be better integration with the platform for development purposes."

What is our primary use case?

We manage the whole software lifecycle. We combine the user stories and requirements, including the test cases, in order to describe the test execution and the defects. We manage the rest of the cycle inside SpiraTeam instead of Jira. In some cases, we started using Jira connected with SpiraTeam. We can manage the whole life cycle of the software in only one tool. 

What is most valuable?

The integration is really better than it was in the past.

The initial setup was pretty simple.

Their documentation is excellent.

The solution is fast and very accessible. 

Organization time is free of charge in terms of licensing. This is until you finalize the migration from one tool to the other. That way, we don't need to pay to license two solutions at the same time.

The maintenance team doing the support gives you a lot of knowledge. They often have up to ten years of support experience. Those leading the support teams are very knowledgeable. There seems to be very little turnover or team change, which helps retain the knowledge

What needs improvement?

The importing aspect is one of the areas that probably could be improved. We talked with Inflectra several times about that point. 

It would be great if they worked more closely with other solutions. There needs to be better integration with the platform for development purposes.

The improvement that's really important is in the reporting. We need to be able to customize it more and to export the reports themselves. You can export the data, however, not the reports.

For how long have I used the solution?

We've been using the solution for a while, and definitely in the last 12 months.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

In order to move from Jira to SpiraTeam, we need the support of Jira due to the fact that in some cases, with high volumes of information, we've had some problems with Jira that we didn't have with SpiraTeam. The stability of SpiraTeam, in general, is very good. We don't have any problems with that. Even documentation about the maintenance windows and improving capacity is very good.

The support provides a baseline for the stability of the server. All of the support below the server is very good. It's quite stable. 

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

There's basically a roadmap, where users can increase the capability year over year. In general, they obtain feedback from the customers and they put the improvements in the roadmap, and then the clients can have clarity on what is needed inside the tool. That is very good. In some cases, not all the providers give you a roadmap about which functionalities will change in the next versions of the tools. In this case, they increase version to version their capability and base it on the feedback from the customer. It's quite good and quite scalable.

Different clients have different amounts of users. Some are near 3,000 while others are under 3,000. When it comes to training on the solution, we have anywhere from 100 to 1,000 pupils at any given time on the solution.

In terms of increasing usage in the future, it's hard to ascertain. At the moment, Argentina is in a very difficult situation, due to the exchange rate of the currency. 

How are customer service and technical support?

The support in Latin America of Inflectra is the best if you compare it with Jira support. Jira is an Australian company and they have several distributors, however, don't give support and they don't have any offices in Latin America.

In the case of Inflectra, they're already aligned with the time zone. We have only five hours time difference with Chile, however, with Australia, we have 12 hours, 11 hours or time difference.

Overall, they are very professional, and in general they fix the problems very quickly.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

I was in charge of a percentage of HP tools for five years. Before that, I worked with tools from IBM, and that has more or less the same. I find this tool is fast and is very accessible.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is really very easy. The documentation is key. The documentation provided by the solution is some of the best documentation that I've seen in the last years. It really is very good and they maintain their quality year over year and even improve the quality of their documentation. The tutorials have videos and there are step-by-step instructions for different situations. They cover basically cover all of the situations that you can see when you are installing. It's really easy to install the products that come from Inflectra.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

The pricing is difficult as the exchange rate is not great. The local currency in relation to the US dollar is not great. It makes it hard for the customer to afford the solution, not necessarily because of the cost, but because of the fluctuating exchange.

We are using the general enterprise license, which is unlimited. We also have access to the solution for training purposes, and that is free.

What other advice do I have?

We are an integrator. We use the tools of Inflectra to integrate into other big solutions.

For training for the government, we created something to provide certification in testing, and in terms of Inflectra, we have asked for sponsorship of that training. They give us SpiraTeam on the cloud with free access for the pupils and the robot Rapise too. That way, we can give people training for one year. We test engineers in theory, expertise, and techniques or methodologies used in SpiraTeam and Rapise. 

Then at this moment, we have nearly 1,000 pupils a year and those pupils, after they obtain the certificate with the Ministry of Education of Argentina (and signed by Inflectra). It's an initiative between the government of the city of Buenos Aires and the Inflectra Corporation. Inflectra gives us the facility to use all the tools.

After the pupils obtain the certificate, in general, they obtain their first job in IBM, Accenture, or in any organization using Inflectra.

Many companies in telecommunication are looking to change their management tool and to move all their solutions to Inflectra solution using the SpiraTeam and Rapise for testing automation. 

We're using the latest version of the solution, as it's on the cloud and consistently updates itself.

Overall, I would rate the solution ten out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Public Cloud
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Integrator
VP
Technial Lead at a transportation company with 1-10 employees
Real User
Top 5Leaderboard
A plethora of advantages in a single, secure environment

Pros and Cons

  • "The traceability is so simple that I don't need to do any additional configurations related to traceability."
  • "The search and replace feature within the tool itself could be improved."

What is our primary use case?

I worked in the ALM and PLM industry, and for my various clients, I have evaluated, I have deployed, and I have come up with a strategy for lifecycle management solutions. Now I want to share the same with people around the world so that they can benefit from my knowledge.

Regarding codeBeamer ALM, I have the SaaS version, I have deployed it on the cloud and I have used the on-premise version as well for my various clients.

Our clients' primary use case was for automotive embedded systems, wherein they required ISO 26262 certification. They also use it as a stronger tool to manage the whole of their portfolio.

We are planning to go all out with codeBeamer. One of our clients has agreed. They have decided strategically that codeBeamer will replace their other tools. They will be retiring IBM Doors, XG, PTC Integrity, and Jama.

How has it helped my organization?

Two of my important clients were trying to work on a couple of big projects which were spread across the globe. CodeBeamer has provided them with an out-of-box solution that doesn't require any additional infrastructure. 

During this pandemic, my clients were able to conveniently work remotely thanks to codeBeamer. When the lockdown situation started happening all of a sudden in most countries, if you have a solution that is browser-based, you can easily provide access to your employees. CodeBeamer has proven to be a scalable solution for working from a home environment.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable feature of codeBeamer is something called a Smart Requirement View. This feature really gives me an advantage and it's something that is available out-of-box. I haven't come across this particular feature in any other tool. Another feature that I like is its traceability.

I can do almost 95% of the customizations without any programming knowledge. I don't need to hire a programmer to do customization. I took a look at the other tools, like IBM and PTC Integrity and Polarion — with those solutions, a lot of programming is required to do even small customizations. With codeBeamer ALM, customization is very straightforward.

Smart View is a valuable feature because that particular view gives me the flexibility of how I should look at my project or how I should look at my work items.

The traceability is so simple that I don't need to do any additional configurations related to traceability. 

One more benefit that I am especially fond of is the ability to migrate from an on-premise server to the cloud, which was very smooth when I compared it to other tools. It just took a couple of hours for complete data migration. In contrast, my experience with PTC and IBM took quite a lot of time, and there was indeed a downtime there when we were migrating. With codeBeamer ALM, when we're migrating, there is almost zero downtime. There were just two minutes of downtime.

What needs improvement?

There are thousands of requirements that are modified or which are reviewed; those reviews cannot be seen at one single point in time. You need to click on each individual review item to check it out. 

The search and replace feature within the tool itself could be improved. Not using any other third-party tools. 

For how long have I used the solution?

I have used this solution for roughly 15 months.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

My impression regarding the stability is that it's an excellent tool.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It's a highly scalable solution compared to any other competitors in the market. In fact, this is one point wherein I rate this tool on top of all the other tools. When I say other tools, I am referring to PTC Integrity, Polarion, and IBM.

How are customer service and technical support?

In general, technical support is quite good, but you have to reach them during their live chat office hours. They should implement a hotline chat, that would be a good feature. Most of the time, emails are replied to within a day.

I would give their technical support a rating of nine out of ten.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was very straightforward. Almost everything is ready to go, straight out of the box — you don't need the assistance of a third-party solution.

The plugins are already ready. You don't need extra time for project configuration.

Deployment takes roughly two days.

What about the implementation team?

We follow a deployment strategy. Our first rollout happened within a week of trials.

We installed codeBeamer and we just enabled and configured the plugins. We tested it on guest servers and we rolled it out immediately within a week. 

Typically, two to three people are more than enough for deployment. One will be the system administrator, another will be the plugin developer and plugin manager, and the third will be the template configurator.

A little bit of maintenance is required, but not much. Specifically maintaining the databases, maintaining the artifacts, managing the access rules, etc. Typically, the admin activities need to be maintained.

What was our ROI?

Our clients are getting a huge dividend on codeBeamer. It allowed them to reduce their admin load by roughly 35-40%. They also experienced a nearly 65-70% reduction regarding customization and the deployment load.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

They're not the most expensive product on the market, but they're not the cheapest either — I'd say codeBeamer ALM is moderately priced.

What other advice do I have?

codeBeamer is a great tool, but having said that, make sure that you have the proper expertise to understand the ALM. As there are around 1,000 plus advantages with codeBeamer, I'd recommend that you go to their website to fully understand just how beautiful that tool is.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of ten.

one important aspect of codeBeamer is its overall capability in multifaceted domains and readily available templates. We talk mostly about it from the automotive aspect, but this tool is great for all industries, specifically the aerospace and pharmaceutical industries.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
VP
Technial Lead at a transportation company with 1-10 employees
Real User
Top 5Leaderboard
Stable with a straightforward setup and good technical support

Pros and Cons

  • "The technical support is quite good."
  • "The configuration aspect of the solution is not easy. A person needs a lot of programming knowledge in order to successfully handle the job."

What is our primary use case?

Polarion can be used typically for application lifecycle management. Typically it's used for requirement management, test case management, and defect tracking. 

What is most valuable?

The product is pretty stable.

The technical support is quite good.

The initial setup is fairly straightforward.

What needs improvement?

The solution is not easy to use.

The configuration aspect of the solution is not easy. A person needs a lot of programming knowledge in order to successfully handle the job.

The cost of the product is quite high. They should work to bring it down a bit so it's not on the higher end of the market.

For how long have I used the solution?

We've been using the solution for almost three years at this point.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

We find the product to be very stable and reliable. However, there are a few issues with the stability that can still be ironed out.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

We aren't really end-users as we're more of a consulting company. However, we do plan to continue to use it in the future.

How are customer service and technical support?

The technical support is quite good. We've never had issues with their services in the past. We've been quite satisfied with them.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We are providing services for codeBeamer for companies that need someone who has knowledge about codeBeamer and can deploy codeBeamer. We deploy PTC Integrity, Polarion, IBM, CLM, and two other products as well. We have around nine to 10 products we use as a deployment. 

How was the initial setup?

Typically, the installation process is quite straightforward and not too complex. However, there are instances where it can get a bit tricky.

What about the implementation team?

Typically, we provide consulting for deployment. We're the consulting company that customers use when they need assistance with deployment. We do the installation for most of our customers as well as the basic configuration so that clients can be ready to use the application.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

It's a pretty expensive solution. It's one of the most expensive solutions out there.

What other advice do I have?

We're a solution provider, so we don't directly use this product. We came across this product and have deployed it for our end client. We are a deployment and development partner for various clients in the automotive industry.

We have a specific partnership with the vendor in Germany. We are not directly related to Polarion. We're a service provider for their vendor.

We are using the latest version of the solution.

I'd recommend this product to other companies, of course, depending on their requirements.

Overall, I would rate it at an eight out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Public Cloud
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner
SP
Senior Consultant at CMEx
Consultant
Top 20
User-friendly with good reporting features assist with managing my test plans, and the support is responsive

Pros and Cons

  • "The creation of test plans is valuable and I like the reporting features."
  • "I have not been able to use the integration with automation features, such as test management automation, with a framework that is written in Java."

What is our primary use case?

We are a small product team and we do software development. I'm part of the testing team and I use Azure DevOps to manage all of my test activities. This includes my test plan, where I create my test cases, write test scripts, execute them, and publish the results using the dashboards.

What is most valuable?

I like a lot of the features in Azure DevOps.

The creation of test plans is valuable and I like the reporting features that it offers. For example, I like the charts, as well as reporting progress.

The interface is user-friendly.

What needs improvement?

I have not been able to use the integration with automation features, such as test management automation, with a framework that is written in Java. Currently, Azure offers frameworks that are written in C#. I have not found anything in the Microsoft documentation to say that it supports other languages.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using Microsoft Azure DevOps for approximately two years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Being a SaaS product, sometimes we experience hangs. However, that is okay because in general, it is very much stable. If there are any outages then I get prior notification of such events.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

I have not tried scaling it. In my team, we have approximately 30 people who are using it.

How are customer service and technical support?

For me, the first point of contact is my internal organization and not Microsoft directly. However, if there are any changes that require Microsoft's intervention then there is an intermediate team who coordinates it. The response has been pretty good and I am happy with the support.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

I have used several tools in the past including Zephyr and the Rational Quality Manager.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is pretty straightforward. We needed to set up a Microsoft account, and that gives access to the projects. Basically, the IT department or IT administrators take care of the access.

As a member of the team, once access is provided, I can just start using it. It is plug-and-play, as far as I'm concerned.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

It is a subscription model and I only pay for what I use.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

Very recently, I was doing comparative studies of available test management solutions on the market and I find Azure DevOps to be pretty good.

What other advice do I have?

Overall, this is a good product and I recommend it.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Public Cloud

If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Get our free report covering Microsoft, Atlassian, PTC, and other competitors of IBM Rational ALM. Updated: September 2021.
542,267 professionals have used our research since 2012.