IBM Rational DOORS Other Advice

MarioCataldi - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Consultant Bip - Business Integration Partners at Business Integration Partners

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

View full review »
SanthoshM - PeerSpot reviewer
Team Lead Technical Architect at Vitesco

If I had considered the latest next-generation features, it would have been easier for me. I'm not a full-time requirement engineer. I am exploring other tools. My organization decides which tools to use. Overall, I rate the tool a six out of ten.

View full review »
CA
Senior Integration System Engineer at NATS (En Route) Plc

If you are quite serious and want everything under control and don't want to make mistakes or deal with the mistakes done, then I can recommend the solution to such individuals. If you are starting to operate from scratch, maybe you should look for other tools in the market that can provide you more facility on cheaper options and are easier to tailor to your needs. If you are already using it, probably keep using it because switching from one in the middle of an operation is quite difficult. But if you are starting to upgrade from scratch, I'll propose you use something else.

I rate the product an eight out of ten.


View full review »
Buyer's Guide
IBM Rational DOORS
March 2024
Learn what your peers think about IBM Rational DOORS. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: March 2024.
767,319 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Yasmine Abib - PeerSpot reviewer
Systems engineer at Expleogroup

Even though it's old, it's efficient, so we are still using it and won't replace it anytime soon.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give IBM Rational DOORS a ten.

View full review »
Korhan Candan - PeerSpot reviewer
Engineer at a aerospace/defense firm with 5,001-10,000 employees

They have a lot of add-ons. I believe they are now on the Cloud; you can use them on the Cloud or on a web browser. I would recommend that version to our company, but I have no suggestions for IBM to include this program.

I just evaluated it for our needs, and it completely meets them. I consider the technical aspects rather than the price.

If I consider the technical aspects alone, I would rate it a ten out of ten. Pricing would be a six or seven out of ten.

I would rate IBM Rational DOORS a nine out of ten.

View full review »
AA
Software Engineer at Kacst

Just to start working on it because I think it will simplify life.

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

View full review »
KP
Senior Software Development Engineer at eQ Technologic

There is no maintenance required until your license needs fixing. However, it is entirely maintainable. You don't have to handle any maintenance until you upgrade to the next version of DOORS, and even then, the process remains straightforward.

IBM Rational DOORS is highly useful for project requirement management. I strongly recommend utilizing DOORS for requirement management and offer flexibility.

DOORS is a valuable tool, and it has attracted numerous customers. Many organizations, including Fortune 500 companies, use DOORS for their operations.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

View full review »
Aman Singla - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Engineer at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees

We are a customer and end-user. 

We have a server-based deployment. 

The solution has some of the most advanced features on offer, which is why we chose the solution.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. It can meet the needs of any developer. However, it does lag a bit. 

View full review »
it_user266616 - PeerSpot reviewer
System Engineering meets DOORS & DXL = Expert in all 3 at Raytheon

I absolutely believe for any company to be successful with DOORS they must invest in an in-house support team of architects & trainers who's full time job it is to deploy DOORS and help programs learn how to use it effectively.

View full review »
KM
Sr. Systems Engineer at a manufacturing company with 1-10 employees

My advice for anybody who is implementing IBM Rational DOORS is to start using it early in the program and use it consistently. In other words, don't let people do their own thing. Instead, come up with a standard process of what you do, which attributes you can use, consistent attribute naming, and consistent standard views. This way, everybody is using the same thing.

There will always be custom things coming up later, but you need to have a core standard. For example, every program will have 10 standard views and 40 standard attributes, which enforces consistency. As you go from program to program, people can understand it. That's all part of the initial setup phase, where you make sure that everybody is doing the same thing.

One of the things that I've been a big advocate for over the years is to remove the human from the process as much as possible. For example, I have to generate a file from DOORS to put in my configuration management tool for a formal release. This is usually a Microsoft Word file. The problem comes about when people edit the file after it is generated because they want to change the formating and other such things. When this happens, there is a risk of human error. Although there are ways to minimize this, I can't eliminate it. As it is now, I have no way of taking the human out of the loop completely.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

View full review »
AS
Spacecraft Systems Engineer at a aerospace/defense firm with 5,001-10,000 employees

For anyone wanting to use this solution, it's important to take the time to learn DXL. Don't take it for granted because understanding how it works will make a big difference. 

I rate the solution six out of 10. 

View full review »
AV
Sr. Director, Software Engineering Director at a healthcare company with 501-1,000 employees

Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of nine.

IBM DOOR is the best tool you can purchase; it's the Cadillac of all tools. Don't be scared of its vast amount of features. Use only what you need, and don't panic about the complexity or the completeness of the tool

View full review »
SH
Software Engineer, Space Systems Department at National Aeronautics and Space Administration

We are currently using IBM Rational DOORS on-premises but we are trying to migrate everything over to a Cloud service.

IBM Rational DOORS is good for privacy, it's good for the management of software requirements, and also for keeping everything organized. It does a pretty good job.

I would rate IBM Rational DOORS an eight out of ten.

View full review »
HZ
Technical Sales Specialist at a computer software company with 1,001-5,000 employees

I rate IBM Rational DOORS eight out of 10. 

View full review »
CW
Process Developer at ZF Friedrichshafen

My advice for anybody looking to implement this solution is to first get the processes right, and then look for the tools.

The whole idea behind this solution is great but, the execution and the handling is old fashioned. It would have been ok ten years ago, but we are used to having better tools now.

I would rate this solution a six out of ten.

View full review »
JK
Lead Modeling & Simulation Engineer at Mitre

I would rate IBM Rational DOORS a seven out of ten.

View full review »
AV
ARP4754 Structured Development & Process Assurance at a transportation company with 10,001+ employees

My advice to others that want to use IBM Rational DOORS is you need to know what is the usage you want to give the solution. If any company wants to do something more mode-based oriented, I would not use IBM Rational DOORS. However, if you have a more textual requirement, IBM Rational DOORS is a good solution.

I rate IBM Rational DOORS a seven out of ten.

View full review »
WL
Systems Engeriner/Owner at a tech services company with 51-200 employees

I rate IBM Rational DOORS a nine out of ten.

View full review »
FC
President at a outsourcing company with 11-50 employees

I would rate IBM Rational DOORS a 10 out of 10. The main reason is that it's what our customers use and what we've been using for many years now, and I don't see any reason to change, frankly.

View full review »
FD
Electronics and Software Development Area Manager at a transportation company with 501-1,000 employees

Our organization does have some commercial agreements with IBM. We're more of a customer, however. We arent an IBM partner.

Whether this would be the correct solution for a company depends on the installation and requirements. You'll need to prepare a specific environment for the company according to how it works. Therefore, it depends on the customization requirements. If they want it related to the environment itself or not, there may be some complexity in the setup that needs to be planned for. That said, I would recommend the solution overall.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. It's pretty good, however, it could improve its overall performance.

View full review »
it_user268761 - PeerSpot reviewer
Requirements Engineer at Visteon Corporation

Many new Rational DOORS users hate the product as a relic from the ‘90s. Most who have used the product over several years are generally ok with it. I like it, but I’ve made my living off it for years so I’m biased.

Rational DOORS can be an excellent requirements management tool, but only if:

  1. All users of the tool are on-site with the server. Rational DOORS should not be considered for distributed teams unless you have a robust method like remote desktops.
  2. All users are trained in how to use the basic features of the tool.
  3. There is an experienced Rational DOORS admin and DXL developer (can be same person) that can support users and create customizations and extensions. Rational DOORS out-of-the-box will never satisfy the needs and desires of users or admins. Only an experienced admin/developer will understand the best-practices for the product and be able to quickly build a layer of customizations and extensions to make life easier for users and admins.

Please note that I consider these points extremely important. You cannot just buy a few Rational DOORS licenses and think you’re done. To be able to use Rational DOORS effectively you must invest in user training and at least one person who is experienced in Rational DOORS.

And finally, perhaps a little off-topic, users ought to be trained in requirements management, especially in safety-conscious industries. For example, earning FAA certification for avionic software is a process whose foundation is requirements management. Users must understand why requirements management is important and be taught how to apply its principles in their work.

The postings on this site are my own and don't necessarily represent Visteon's positions, strategies, or opinions. #iwork4visteon

View full review »
JA
System Engineer / Requirements Engineer / Managing Director at CCC Systems Engineering Suisse GmbH

What we actually have learned — or even maybe accepted and are comfortable with is now — is that for the user projects work best and most efficiently, it is absolutely nicer to work in a more structured way. This product helps order our projects. Because of what the tool does, we have a way to document the bare base engineering. What we did in the past, before DOORS, we all used Word and maybe Excel in our offices to set up our specifications for the product. In DOORS, we can now work in a different way. There are very nice features that help to structure your documents, to link your documents, and make a different analysis, test your approach and see it better. There were no tools like this in Word and Excel.  

You also have the possibility to re-use things. It is quite nice to use a tool that allows you to use all your experience from a technical point of view and create the solutions in one data source and one tool and use components you create for various other projects as well.  

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate IBM Rational DOORS as an eight-out-of-ten.  

View full review »
it_user1298796 - PeerSpot reviewer
Director at Innovation & Design Engineering Ltd

My advice to anybody who is considering this solution is that if you're looking for a relational database, then it's probably not the first place that I would go. People are going to use it because the client requires it, as in our case, rather than because you choose it. There are much better database setups out there, which are scalable for non-IT database people. The learning curve is much shallower because they're designed from the ground up to work as a database for normal people.

Overall, DOORS is old and clunky but it does what it is supposed to do. The interface hasn't changed forever because there's no drive to make it easier to use.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

View full review »
it_user278004 - PeerSpot reviewer
Engineering Consultant, System Engineer at GE Aviation, UK

I have worked with DOORS since 2000. I have used DOORS as an engineer managing my requirement, verification and tests, as an expert user, creating DXL scripts to export documents to Word, as an admin managing users and the entire database (multiple databases through the sites). I have developed Verification Tools in DOORS that control all the process of verifying the requirement from creation of the test procedure and script to writing the results and running the test (reviews, accesses etc.). I have a big experience in DXL and I can achieve anything with DXL (with some limitations). What I have seen over and over again is that the use of DOORS is incorrect in a lot of companies. Most of the companies try to adjust the processes to the tools provided instead of adjusting the tools to the correct process. DOORS can be adjusted to the process that you would like to work with, if you think about the process first in isolation of the tool, then, you cannot go wrong with DOORS. The other way around will lead in a lot of effort to put everything right. Standardisation is another issue that companies get it wrong. Users does not want to standardise, they want to do their own thing. The effect is that they use DOORS and for the same work there are a lot of different ways of doing it. They use DOORS as a repository and not as a tool to help them achieve their work easier. DOORS can help you to standardise, minimise mistakes and effort needed to achieve your goal, which can lead in reducing the cost of your development, validation and verification of your product.

View full review »
NK
Quality Assurance at Varroc Lighting System

It’s a good choice to invest money in, and will definitely prove to be value for money, even more if it's not utilized to the best possible extent. Proper planning on board will definitely prove to be beneficial.

View full review »
it_user268722 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Specialist/Analyst at a aerospace/defense firm with 501-1,000 employees

If you do not have a resident Rational DOORS expertise, invest some up-front money to secure the assistance of one to help with deployment, tailoring and training,

View full review »
JA
System Engineer / Requirements Engineer / Managing Director at CCC Systems Engineering Suisse GmbH

I have been using classic DOORS version 9.6.1.11 and I was interested in switching to IBM DOORS Next Generation, but it is not as easy as I thought. The complexity is quite different and it is not very user-friendly. You used to have your own client and database, but now that it is mixed with the web, it doesn't make sense for me to use it.

Unfortunately, I think that DOORS was a nice tool and it is a pity that it has been ruined by IBM. The technical support is a mess and it is not the quality from the past.

I still really enjoy working with this tool. Even though it has been taken over by IBM, it is something that I have to live with.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

View full review »
JK
Lead Modeling & Simulation Engineer at Mitre

Although I cannot say with certainty, I do not believe my company has a business relationship with IBM.

I do not know which version of the solution we are currently using.

I would recommend the solution to other organizations.

Overall, I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. While it's largely helpful, there are just a few things, like unresponsive technical support and difficulty with the general learning curve, which could make it more user-friendly.

View full review »
it_user283440 - PeerSpot reviewer
Programme Manager for Engineering (Mechanical) at a university with 1,001-5,000 employees

Use DOORS Next Generation or later versions of DOORS v9.X

View full review »
JT
System Engineer at Toll Collect GmbH

I would give Rational DOORS a rating of nine out of ten.

View full review »
GR
Corporate Engineering at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees

If you have a high number of requirements to manage and if there is a need to sustain these baseline of requirements for a couple of years, it is the right solution for you. However, if you have a small project, it's not mandatory.

In the next release of this product I would like to see a better user interface. I would like it to have the capacity to include drawing and to produce KPIs on the requirement baseline. Also, the kind of dashboard is not very convenient. 

On a scale from 1 to 10, I rate this product a seven.

View full review »
it_user292626 - PeerSpot reviewer
System Engineer with 1,001-5,000 employees

Get someone who is familiar with the product to manage

View full review »
it_user276396 - PeerSpot reviewer
Principal Consultant/Director at a tech services company with 51-200 employees

Develop good requirements development and management process firstly then design and implement a DOORS schema and training around your process. Simplicity and consistency is the key to a successful implementation. Management buy in and support is also essential.

View full review »
LV
Project Manager at a tech services company with 201-500 employees

Our requirement is not for a huge database, just around 30,000 records. It's a shame that IBM Rational DOORS Classic is so slow in accessing such a small number of records. It's really new to the data architecture approach from the past, that is, from Telelogic.

In the new version, they no longer support Excel. So, we have to redo the whole configuration of the project, which takes a lot of time and energy. When I look at other solutions based on the results of the benchmark analysis, they look easier to work or install.

I'm also looking into the capability to export, and I got several issues with IBM, especially with the OSAC interface. There are some questions on the IBM website to assess whether it will really work or whether it is a limitation. Because it is not a well-defined limitation, you have to try. When you try and spend a lot of time and energy and do extra work, you find the limitations in what you can do, which makes it very slow.

In the past, IBM Rational DOORS was the best solution for me because it was the only one but today, people are not really attached to IBM Rational DOOR. They have to use it, but I'm not convinced that they're really attached to it.

I would rate this solution a five out of ten. It is complex, doesn't work as expected, and isn't easy to illustrate. I would expect IBM to have something better prepared, better integrated, and more compatible with I could do in the past.

View full review »
BP
DOORS Expert at a healthcare company with 10,001+ employees

The solution can be used in the studio environment, but you need to manage it correctly.

I would rate the solution six out of ten.

View full review »
LM
Systems Engineer at a comms service provider with 51-200 employees

I would definitely recommend DOORS to people who need this kind of solution. You would probably need to have a reasonably large-sized project to use it because of the cost. But I can definitely recommend it if the need is there.  

On a scale from one to ten (where one is the worst and ten is the best), I would rate IBM Rational DOORS as about a seven-of-ten, I reckon. What would need to be included to improve that score is probably cloud hosting.  

View full review »
it_user270897 - PeerSpot reviewer
CTO at a computer software company with 51-200 employees

Make sure you know your pains before starting the process.

View full review »
DH
General Manager & Founder/consultant at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees

The difficulty with implementing this solution is that you are asking the organization to change its processes. The important part is, however, that you are trying to improve the quality of the systems. You have to maintain the customer's vision and show that the goals will be reached, but done more efficiently. In the end, you have to give the customer every assurance that the work is done in its entirety.

This is a solution that I recommend. If people need to write specifications in the context of engineering then I think that this is the best solution on the market. If on the other hand, you want to manage requirements, then I don't think that it is an appropriate tool.

Similarly, DOORS is a good tool because you have to maintain compliance with all of the requirements during development. If you have a supplier with no needs or requirements then it is not at all an appropriate tool.

Overall, it is a good solution but they need to update the user interface. If they also lower the price then it would be perfect.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

View full review »
it_user364206 - PeerSpot reviewer
Principal Systems Architect at a manufacturing company with 1,001-5,000 employees

Don't use Citrix or a virtual environment to implement a global solutions. It causes problems when linking between tools.

View full review »
it_user284166 - PeerSpot reviewer
Requirements Analyst - KSN Site Administrator at a aerospace/defense firm with 1,001-5,000 employees

It's better if your partners use the same tool, which makes for better sharing of files and artefacts.

View full review »
Buyer's Guide
IBM Rational DOORS
March 2024
Learn what your peers think about IBM Rational DOORS. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: March 2024.
767,319 professionals have used our research since 2012.