I am not aware of the exact pricing of the solution. Many years ago, it was quite expensive, and my understanding is it is still not a low price. There are free tools on the market now as well, and therefore the price may be an issue.
It was expensive for us. For the first two weeks, we had to employ people now and then as the system needed to be more accurate. It cost us a lot of money. I rate the solution's pricing as a seven or an eight out of ten.
Learn what your peers think about OpenText ALM / Quality Center. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: April 2024.
Global Lead at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
2021-08-19T18:29:02Z
Aug 19, 2021
I can't comment much on pricing. The reason is, we get the pricing for Micro Focus through SAP as part of an enterprise contract. We don't actually get it from Microsoft Focus and due to the fact that there's a part of the SAP that's 15 years old, we have one of the cheapest licenses probably in the world. That's one of the reasons why it's hard for us to make a business case to move to any other product at the moment, as the licensing is quite cheap for us.
Senior Specialist - Quality Engineer at a financial services firm with 201-500 employees
Real User
2021-04-13T20:05:53Z
Apr 13, 2021
The licensing model is an area that can be improved. The cost of licensing depends on the number of VMs that you are running test cases on and it is not cheap. To the best of my recollection, it is several thousand dollars per license.
Sr. Manager - SAP Authorization & Complaince at a pharma/biotech company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
2020-12-01T09:12:17Z
Dec 1, 2020
It is very expensive as compared to other tools. We didn't get their premier version. It is a lesser version, and to upgrade, there will be an additional cost for us.
Sr. Solution Architect at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Real User
2020-11-02T14:56:31Z
Nov 2, 2020
I don't know the exact numbers, but I know it is pricey. When we talked to the sales reps we work with from our company, they say, "Well, Micro Focus will never lose on price." So, they are willing to do a lot of negotiating if it is required.
From a pricing point of view, I believe it is an enterprise tool. If you are an enterprise organization and you're using SAP or Oracle for your ERP systems, for example, the cost around Quality Center is not that expensive. From a licensing and planning point of view, you should have a hybrid between licenses you own and depending on how busy you are at certain stages within projects, do additional rentals just for those periods if need be. That's what we do in our environment, we have a base of 15 licenses. If we have any major projects coming in where we know there are additional developers, we do a rental for licenses for the period of that project. We charge that project for the licenses for that rental. We do have additional costs apart from standard licensing from our side. Pick n Pay outsources their hardware, so obviously we have costs for the hardware and backup for our hardware partners that do our hosting. We see this as a tier-one application in our environment. We have full disaster recovery capability. There some costs involved from that side.
It all comes down to how many people are going to access the tool. When teams go above 20, I think ALM is a better tool to use from a collaboration and streamlining perspective.
IS Director, ERP PTP Solution Architecture at a healthcare company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
2020-06-28T08:51:00Z
Jun 28, 2020
Depending on the volume, the annual maintenance costs vary on a percentage but it's around $300 a year per license for maintenance. It's at 18% of the total cost of the license.
The licensing determines the number of users we can enable in a particular project. There is a full license and a defect license. Full licenses are used by a few of the guys at our level. We'll give a defect license to the development team only, to access whatever defects there are, weekly, bi-weekly, or monthly. We did not buy our ALM licenses directly from Micro Focus. We bought them from SAP, which is another solution we are using. We depend on SAP when it comes to whatever challenges come up. The source for us is SAP. We do have a pricing concern. If we go directly to Micro Focus, they'll sell it at a higher price. If we go to some other vendor, they sell it at a lower price. My manager then says, "Okay, it's the same tool. Why do we need to buy it directly? Whatever problems come up, we can resolve them at our end." Of course, we don't know if we'll have one or two problems or not, and that is the reason to go for the higher price. But they went with SAP to buy the license.
Sr. Architect at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Real User
2020-06-25T10:53:00Z
Jun 25, 2020
Pricing is not my area, but in general, what I've seen when reading articles is that it is costly. That is the reason most customers are moving to the other solutions, which are much cheaper. That is the opinion of people I have spoken to in other companies.
Test Manager at a construction company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
2020-06-18T08:15:00Z
Jun 18, 2020
When you have to ramp up your licenses and you have to scale it up, it's quite a costly product. You have to keep an eye on how many people are using it. You can't just give access to users who are only there to take on excess work and who are not using it. It is not a very economical solution.
Test Specialist at a consultancy with self employed
Real User
2020-06-04T09:41:00Z
Jun 4, 2020
The solution has the ability to handle a large number of projects and users in an enterprise environment with the correct license. Most vendors offer the same pricing, though some vendors offer a cheaper price for their cloud/SaaS solution versus their on-premise. However, cloud/SaaS solutions result in a loss of freedom. E.g., if you want to make a change, most of the time it needs to be validated by the vendor, then you're being charged an addition fee. Sometimes, even if you are rejected, you are charged because it's a risk to the entire environment.
Performance and Automation Testing Squad Lead at a financial services firm with 5,001-10,000 employees
Real User
2020-05-27T08:03:00Z
May 27, 2020
As an end-user, of course I'm going to say that it's too expensive and I want things cheaper, but don't we all? Aside from the standard licensing fee there are no additional costs. It's set up with a good agreement that runs three-yearly.
IT Quality and Architecture Senior Manager at Vodafone
Real User
2020-05-19T07:27:00Z
May 19, 2020
The pricing has been the same for the past few years. It is reasonable. It is not very high. Of course, the cheaper the better, from our point of view. But the tool and its quality are amazing, really good. And including the support their team is giving us, I think the price is justified. It's a fair price.
Compared to the market, the price is high. We just renewed our licenses, which took time to do. I think we have 30 concurrent licenses. The world is changing to open source code and free applications. This may be an issue in the future.
For licensing, find out the number of users who will be using it concurrently, and use that number as a starting point for the number of licenses to purchase. Quality Center is pricey, but cheaper is not always less expensive.
OpenText ALM/Quality Center serves as the single pane of glass for software quality management. It helps you govern application lifecycle management activities and implement rigorous, auditable lifecycle processes.
I am not aware of the exact pricing of the solution. Many years ago, it was quite expensive, and my understanding is it is still not a low price. There are free tools on the market now as well, and therefore the price may be an issue.
It was expensive for us. For the first two weeks, we had to employ people now and then as the system needed to be more accurate. It cost us a lot of money. I rate the solution's pricing as a seven or an eight out of ten.
Compared to other solutions, licensing costs are in the mid-range.
I don't handle any aspect of the pricing.
This is an expensive solution.
I cannot comment on licensing as another department handles it.
Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is very expensive. The price is approximately £2,000 per person, they are too expensive to corner the market.
ALM Quality Center is a little bit costly.
I'm not aware of the pricing or licensing cost for Micro Focus ALM Quality Center.
I can't comment much on pricing. The reason is, we get the pricing for Micro Focus through SAP as part of an enterprise contract. We don't actually get it from Microsoft Focus and due to the fact that there's a part of the SAP that's 15 years old, we have one of the cheapest licenses probably in the world. That's one of the reasons why it's hard for us to make a business case to move to any other product at the moment, as the licensing is quite cheap for us.
The enterprise pricing and licensing are reasonable.
I've never been in the procurement process for it. I don't think it is cheap. Some of the features can be quite expensive.
It's a perpetual license.
The licensing model is an area that can be improved. The cost of licensing depends on the number of VMs that you are running test cases on and it is not cheap. To the best of my recollection, it is several thousand dollars per license.
The licensing costs vary from client to client. There are different prices for SaaS versus on-premises deployments, for example.
It is very expensive as compared to other tools. We didn't get their premier version. It is a lesser version, and to upgrade, there will be an additional cost for us.
Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is very expensive. Personally, I think that it's too expensive, but I don't have another tool to compare it to.
I don't know the exact numbers, but I know it is pricey. When we talked to the sales reps we work with from our company, they say, "Well, Micro Focus will never lose on price." So, they are willing to do a lot of negotiating if it is required.
From a pricing point of view, I believe it is an enterprise tool. If you are an enterprise organization and you're using SAP or Oracle for your ERP systems, for example, the cost around Quality Center is not that expensive. From a licensing and planning point of view, you should have a hybrid between licenses you own and depending on how busy you are at certain stages within projects, do additional rentals just for those periods if need be. That's what we do in our environment, we have a base of 15 licenses. If we have any major projects coming in where we know there are additional developers, we do a rental for licenses for the period of that project. We charge that project for the licenses for that rental. We do have additional costs apart from standard licensing from our side. Pick n Pay outsources their hardware, so obviously we have costs for the hardware and backup for our hardware partners that do our hosting. We see this as a tier-one application in our environment. We have full disaster recovery capability. There some costs involved from that side.
It all comes down to how many people are going to access the tool. When teams go above 20, I think ALM is a better tool to use from a collaboration and streamlining perspective.
Depending on the volume, the annual maintenance costs vary on a percentage but it's around $300 a year per license for maintenance. It's at 18% of the total cost of the license.
The licensing determines the number of users we can enable in a particular project. There is a full license and a defect license. Full licenses are used by a few of the guys at our level. We'll give a defect license to the development team only, to access whatever defects there are, weekly, bi-weekly, or monthly. We did not buy our ALM licenses directly from Micro Focus. We bought them from SAP, which is another solution we are using. We depend on SAP when it comes to whatever challenges come up. The source for us is SAP. We do have a pricing concern. If we go directly to Micro Focus, they'll sell it at a higher price. If we go to some other vendor, they sell it at a lower price. My manager then says, "Okay, it's the same tool. Why do we need to buy it directly? Whatever problems come up, we can resolve them at our end." Of course, we don't know if we'll have one or two problems or not, and that is the reason to go for the higher price. But they went with SAP to buy the license.
Pricing is not my area, but in general, what I've seen when reading articles is that it is costly. That is the reason most customers are moving to the other solutions, which are much cheaper. That is the opinion of people I have spoken to in other companies.
Pricing is managed by our headquarters. I am able to get from them for very cheap. The market price is horribly expensive.
When you have to ramp up your licenses and you have to scale it up, it's quite a costly product. You have to keep an eye on how many people are using it. You can't just give access to users who are only there to take on excess work and who are not using it. It is not a very economical solution.
The solution has the ability to handle a large number of projects and users in an enterprise environment with the correct license. Most vendors offer the same pricing, though some vendors offer a cheaper price for their cloud/SaaS solution versus their on-premise. However, cloud/SaaS solutions result in a loss of freedom. E.g., if you want to make a change, most of the time it needs to be validated by the vendor, then you're being charged an addition fee. Sometimes, even if you are rejected, you are charged because it's a risk to the entire environment.
As an end-user, of course I'm going to say that it's too expensive and I want things cheaper, but don't we all? Aside from the standard licensing fee there are no additional costs. It's set up with a good agreement that runs three-yearly.
The pricing has been the same for the past few years. It is reasonable. It is not very high. Of course, the cheaper the better, from our point of view. But the tool and its quality are amazing, really good. And including the support their team is giving us, I think the price is justified. It's a fair price.
Compared to the market, the price is high. We just renewed our licenses, which took time to do. I think we have 30 concurrent licenses. The world is changing to open source code and free applications. This may be an issue in the future.
We have divided our licenses between Micro Focus ALM and ALM Octane. It works for us.
It allows us to keep our costs low. I do not want to pay beyond a certain point for this solution.
For licensing, find out the number of users who will be using it concurrently, and use that number as a starting point for the number of licenses to purchase. Quality Center is pricey, but cheaper is not always less expensive.
Original cost was $158,000. Our day-to-day cost is difficult to compute, but it’s very low.