Polarion Requirements Reviews

The primary use case involves developing custom products. We manage the requirements there.

The biggest improvement would be in the transparency we have now. We have very complex products. We make whole systems with difficult and diverse areas such as hardware, software, mechanical and printing, etc. To get the overview of all the requirements into a system, at that sizing, is the main advantage we have in the organization now.

The tool as a whole is very valuable. It isn't just one or two features. The combination of requirement and test management is very good for us.

The one thing I would mention is the license policy is a little bit difficult. For different roles, you will need different license models. That seems a little bit difficult for us. Especially when you introduce such a complex system, you want to know the right way is to do licensing. It's not clear what that best way would be. The solution will be here for a long time, and I just think it could be more clear.

The solution is very stable.

The solution is very scalable. We have around 50 licenses.

I've never reached out to technical support personally, but my colleagues have, and I have not heard any complaints, so I believe they're okay.

I have experience, from the very basic former engineering requirement, with Excel. It's not really acceptable for the complex items we have. We had another product which was not so good because of the user experience. We have chosen Polarion to make things easier.

This is a new product for us. We have to monitor the experience over a longer time to see if benefits will come to us.

We are using the on-premises deployment model.

My advice to others considering implementing the solution is that you should check your requirements for such a tool and process. Everything depends on the company. Our experience was to first fix the process of engineering requirements for vendor tools. We had to prepare for the introduction of the solution very well by creating a proper process. It's very important to go through everything beforehand.

I would rate the solution nine out of ten.

We are users of the product and I'm a systems engineer. We use the product to review and assign requirements we receive from customers. For now we have around 10 people using the solution. This may be increased in the coming months. 

The most valuable feature from my side would be the comparison composition but it doesn't work every time. If you have a long document and depending on the requirements it can sometimes time out. 

The product could be improved if the NTS solution worked more quickly, it's sometimes very slow. As a starting point, I'd like to see more requirements.

An additional feature for the next release would be to include a better import option from the data requirement solutions.

It's been more than two years since we implemented it. 

It is stable enough but if you would like to work with more requirement objects, then you will get timeouts. So it's stable, but not usable all the time.

I'm not sure that the scalability is good. I think we have enough room and memory on our server for it to work but it is too slow and we get timeouts. In that respect I don't think scalability is good. 

Technical support is fine, but they haven't solved our main problem. They are very direct and helpful, but couldn't solve the problem.

We previously used IBM DOORS which isn't exactly the same solution so it's difficult to compare, but for requirements management, it was better.

Initial setup was straightforward and took around two to three hours to deploy.

We purchased the product, so now we only have to pay for maintenance.

There were other products evaluated but I was not part of the team involved in that process. 

For anyone interested in the product I would suggest evaluating it in real conditions, with a specific project because of the issue with requirements.

I would rate this product a two out of 10.

It is easier to produce documents using the platform.

The platform's review process for the documents could be better.

We use the platform to provide regulatory documents for specific products.

It is a stable platform. I rate its stability an eight out of ten.

We never encounter any scalability issues during the deployment.

The technical support services need improvement.

Neutral

The difficulty level of the product's initial setup depends on the complexity of the specific project. It is simple for minimum configurations. But it is much more complex for multiple requirements. We encounter errors regarding the migration of data from the management tool. We have to ensure that it supports all the functionality from the previous solution. It is quite complicated. We develop our protocol to tackle it.

The product's price is high. However, it is an efficient solution for managing complex products.

We used IBM before. We switched to Polarion Requirements for better pricing.

I rate Polarion Requirements an eight out of ten.

We use it for requirements management.

Its flexibility and APIs are the most valuable.

Its user interface could be more user friendly. In addition, a lot of features are missing for test management. It should have the test case ordering feature.

I have been using this solution for a year and a half.

It is very stable.

It is scalable. You can add a lot of documents and the volume can be increased. We have 20 users. It has not really been adopted by the end users in our company, but this is not because of Polarion. This is related to the processes used in the company.

Technical support provided by the vendor in France was very good.

The technical setup was quite easy, but the process for setting up the required templates was complex. It took one day for us to deploy it.

It is expensive but not for what it is. It is just the right price for what it is. Its price is also similar to other solutions. 

Polarion should not be used for project management. It should be used for feasibility and requirement management. I would recommend to use it first to understand the features and then improve it. We wanted to improve and adapt it to our new requirements, but we never finished doing that. So, we are not able to release. It is a little bit hard to understand the features. That's why I am recommending to use it first. 

I would rate Polarion Requirements an eight out of ten. It is quite a good solution.