What advice do you have for others considering IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation?

I rate the overall solution a seven out of ten. I would recommend it, particularly for organizations embarking on transformational projects that involve rapid changes. The product is particularly strong in configuration management and change management.

IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation is not that difficult to maintain, but it definitely needs a team that can continuously be involved in the maintenance part, do upgrades, and implement whatever patches are released. If there is growth in the product's user base, then there is a need to revalidate the infrastructure and see whether it is adequate because you need the tool to offer more performance, which is very important. There is a six-member team in our company to maintain the product. To others who plan to use the solution, I suggest that they involve experts to take care of the installation part and involve IBM from the time the product's usage starts. It is not recommended that you explore the solution by yourself. I rate the overall tool an eight out of ten.

We just stepped up to the next generation of the solution maybe two years ago. I'd rate the solution an eight out of ten. It's been around for a while, and we've had it for a while. I do not ever recall getting off of this and going with another tool. It's been a very useful tool for us.

Overall, I would rate IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation an eight out of 10.

I would tell people considering this solution that in my 25 years of experience within systems engineering and being heavily involved in requirements, development, sustainability and management, there's not a better tool out there. I've been a chief engineer for 20-something years and to me, DOORS is the gold standard for requirements management. I would rate this solution as a ten out of ten.

IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation is a different approach than IBM Rational DOORS (Classic). It has the name because the plan was for it to take over the customers from DOORS Classic, but as the functionality is different and not the same as what's on DOORS Classic, both of the tools have their place in the market. It's a different kind of work and it's a different kind of functionality behind DOORS Next Generation vs DOORS Classic. The first contact with this new DOORS solution was in 2008, but I was not working from 2008 until now, because at the beginning it was very cumbersome to work with it and I had more problems with it than the ability to work. I've been using the latest version: 7.0.2 with the IPIX 8a, which is the latest IPIX of this version. We have this solution on-premises. I have here some servers where the IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation is installed, then the Jazz platform. We have DOORS Next Generation, then we also have to complete the Jazz platform here, where it is implemented. My main recommendation to people looking into implementing IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation vs IBM Rational DOORS (Classic) is DOORS Next Generation. IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation is the future and it has a lot of very nice features in it. If possible, use it, but if you need specific things which you can do only in DOORS (Classic), then use the classic version. Normally, they should aim for DOORS Next Generation, as it is more future-oriented in the setup. I would rate this solution a nine out of ten. It is very good, but it is not perfect, so not a ten. It is better than DOORS Classic because I know of a lot of problems when working with the Classic version for 20 years. There are all these different things that can go wrong with DOORS Classic.

My advice to anybody who is considering this solution is to adopt it. I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

Be really clear about your business process, what you want the tool to achieve and how it's going to achieve that and work with the facilitator. I would rate this product a 3 out of 5 because it is not intuitive and is difficult for our users to use.

I'm selling the solution to customers, as well as installing it, and configuring it. Currently, I'm using it for a customer. We use the on-premises deployment model. We're also IBM partners. I'd recommend the solution. It's a quality product. It's not cheap, but if you want quality you have to pay for it. I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

I would suggest finding someone, who already has experience with implementing this solution, to help you with the implementation. It will be easier and you will have fewer problems, as product and configuration is quite complex. What we have learned from our experience is that upgrades should be done with the help of the external IBM partners of IBM services team. You can think also to have solution in cloud, but from price perspective the price in cloud is not attractive, specially in case as our when we use floating licences. The user interface could be improved, it is quite heavy and not-intuituve.The interface is quite complex, as it takes a lot of clicks to perform some actions. The architecture design of this product is from my perspective too complex. The design is based on Java, Websphere. Once there are issues, they can't be resolved by the customer easily and usually require help from support. It's great to have the support but nice to have the option not to need it every time and for every problem. They should change the design and model to be more distributed. I personally don't like heavy monolithic application. I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.