Tricentis qTest Previous Solutions

RyanO'Neill
Sr. Manager Quality Assurance at Forcepoint LLC (Formerly Raytheon|Websense)
We used JIRA and both the Zephyr and the Xray plugins. The scalability of those plug-ins was usually fine. They scaled along with JIRA, and JIRA is endlessly scalable. Reporting is where they would fall down. JIRA doesn't have the greatest reporting and most of the reporting is manual. When you're looking at reporting within qTest, most of it is already built for you. It has canned reports that already exist and which don't require a lot of effort. Mind you, that is where qTest somewhat falls down as well, on the reporting side of things, but it is still head-and-shoulders above the open-source solutions. The decision to move to qTest was due to the way we had our implementation. We had no central, single enterprise-class test case management solution available to any of our teams. As they grew and became more extensive, they found either that the low-budget solutions they were using, or the open-source solutions that we're using, or the complete lack of solutions that they had, were simply not adequate. The decision was made at that time by upper management that we needed to find a central, enterprise-class solution for test case management. View full review »
RobinaLaughlin
Assistant Vice President, IT Quality Assurance at Guardian Life Insurance
We were using the HP suite. We switched because of price point and ease of use. We went into agile quickly, as an enterprise, and HP wasn't at an agile point at that time. We needed to make a switch. qTest is much more intuitive and straightforward. There's not a lot of complexity to it. HP opened up the world so there were far too many features than we needed. That became a burden over time. HP's integration with JIRA was difficult. It was a thick client and it was very difficult to use the web interface and have good response times. I could go on and on, but you get the gist of it. View full review »
NancyMcClanahan
Quality Assurance Team Lead at Parkview Health
I have used Micro Focus LoadRunner at a couple of locations. The Micro Focus tool is very complex and not as user-friendly as qTest is. I knew that implementing HP, plus the price — it is much more expensive than qTest — would be more difficult. So the factors were both price and usability of the tool. Because some of the people who do our testing are not IS people. They don't understand the software development lifecycle. You have to make it simple for them to use, and I can do that within qTest. View full review »
Learn what your peers think about Tricentis qTest. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: April 2020.
419,360 professionals have used our research since 2012.
reviewer1215417
Senior Director of Quality Engineering at a tech vendor with 1,001-5,000 employees
We worked with a customized plugin within JIRA, not even a basic, off-the-shelf version. It was an in-house created module that was built to integrate. They couldn't afford to buy a plug-in, so they made one. That was why we started looking for a new solution. It was horrible. I would have preferred Excel. View full review »
Raja-Veeraraghavan
Automation Lead at LogiXML
Previously, we used Micro Focus ALM. Now, we have divided our products internally: an old product where we use Micro Focus, and a new product for which we wanted a newer tool to be implemented, which is qTest. View full review »
JovanKangrga
Testing Lead Manager at PDC Energy
Cost and time were the main reasons I went with qTest. If I were to have my choice, I probably would have implemented the Micro Focus product because I am familiar with it and know it can do everything I wanted to do. But that would likely have been overkill; way more than this project needed, and it was much more costly. I was looking at another tool, the SmartBear QAComplete tool that I had used on a previous project. I didn't necessarily like that tool, but its cost was less than either qTest or HP QC/ALM. But once I get my hands on qTest, I definitely liked it better than the QAComplete product. The ease of use and the interface helped push me toward qTest. I had also called a friend and he said. You have to look at QASymphony or Tricentis. This qTest is good." I said, "Are you sure?" He said, "Yes, it's good. Trust me." That helped push me over the top. View full review »
VSwaminathan
Product QA Manager at Reflexis Systems
Previously we had TestLink but we found many challenges with it when we had to run automated tests. There are good features in qTest, which helps us in maintaining it and sharing with others, with ease. The UIs are good and give a lot of flexibility to the testers when working with them. Those are some of the main reasons that we chose qTest for our test management. We did an extensive evaluation of qTest. We had multiple people from Tricentis helping us during our evaluation process. It has been adding value to our organization. View full review »
reviewer1219371
Manager, IT Quality Assurance (EDM/ITSRC/Infrastructure) at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
We used to have Micro Focus ALM Quality Center as our test management tool and we were nearing our licensing limitation at the time. We evaluated a couple of tools in the market and we picked up qTest because it had a better reporting mechanism and dashboard features, along with a clean integration with JIRA. View full review »
reviewer1229907
Division Chief with 10,001+ employees
We were using Rational ClearCase before and we switched because it's antiquated and outdated. We did Excel spreadsheets and saved stuff on network drives. We use the unified functional testing as our automated stuff but it was all very manual. This is way better than what we were doing before. View full review »
ChrisFirst
Senior Architect at a manufacturing company with 1,001-5,000 employees
In this organization, Tricentis was the first. In my last job we used Micro Focus Quality Center. Both it and qTest are a pain. They're pretty similar. View full review »
Learn what your peers think about Tricentis qTest. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: April 2020.
419,360 professionals have used our research since 2012.