OpenText ALM / Quality Center vs Polarion ALM comparison

"It's easy to create defects and easy to sync them up with a developer. Immediately, once created, it will trigger an email to the developer and we'll start a conversation with the developer regarding the requirements that have not been matched."

"It allows us to easily make linkage and dependencies, with plenty of integrations."

"The independent view of elevated access is good."

"Within Quality Center, you have the dashboard where you can monitor your progress over different entities. You can build your own SQL query segments, and all that data is there in the system, then you can make a dashboard report."

"It is stable and reliable."

"What's most valuable in Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is that it's useful for these activities: test designing, test planning, and test execution."

"The tools could be useful if we were utilizing them more effectively"

"I like the traceability, especially between requirements, testing, and defects."

"It offers good performance."

"Polarion ALM has some valuable tools for managing our targets and requirements. I think that's its best feature."

"I am impressed with the solution’s stability."

"The solution offers good integration."

"The tool's most valuable feature is its browser experience. I rate its traceability feature a ten out of ten. From the initial stage to the release, you can manage everything through a single point."

"The technical support is quite good."

"The initial setup of this solution was straightforward, and there were not too many problems with it."

"The features I find the most valuable are requirement tracking and schematics."

"The session timeout time needs to be longer in my opinion."

"They should specify every protocol or process with labels or names."

"Sometimes I do run my queries from the admin login. However, if I want to reassess all my test cases, then I am still doing this in a manual manner. I write SQL queries, then fire them off. Therefore, a library of those SQL queries would help. If we could have a typical SQL query to change the parameters within test cases, then this is one aspect I can still think that could be included in ALM. Though they would need to be analyzed and used in a very knowledgeable way."

"I'm looking at more towards something more from a DevOps perspective. For example, how to pull the DevOps ecosystem into the Micro Focus ALM."

"Quality Center's UI is outdated, and it's a little bit slow on the login part and different parts of the application. That's why we're switching solutions. I believe most companies are switching to Octane or something else. Micro Focus should enhance the interface and reports."

"Cross project reporting is limited to similar database schemas"

"Micro Focus ALM Quality Center could improve how the automation process works. Addiotnlally, the parallel execution needs to be optimized. For example, if multiple users, which are two or more users, are doing an execution, while we execute the cases, I have seen some issues in the progress."

"There's room for improvement in the requirements traceability with Micro Focus ALM Quality Center. That could use an uplift."

"Integration requires a lot of effort. You typically need to work with an implementation partner to get it done. Most connectors available for Polarion ALM are paid. Unlike other vendors offering several standard connectors for free, integrating third-party software with Polarion ALM involves discussing and coordinating with the third-party software providers, which requires effort."

"The weak point of Polarion ALM software is about reporting and time for extraction of the data...The quality of reporting needs to improve."

"The most important thing for them to improve should be platform-independent features. They should also provide extensive pipelines and release pipelines that we can define and we can work on."

"The solution needs to improve its user experience and graphics."

"The configuration aspect of the solution is not easy. A person needs a lot of programming knowledge in order to successfully handle the job."

"The tool needs to improve its planning. It also needs to add more integrations."

"We use PTC Windchill, and Polarion ALM doesn't have native integration, so we had to purchase the connector to integrate it with Polarion ALM. We still haven't implemented it."

"Technical support needs some improvement."

"Seat and concurrent licensing models exist; the latter is recommended if a large number of different users will be utilizing the product."

"The cost of licensing depends on the number of VMs that you are running test cases on and it is not cheap."

"The full ALM license lets you use the requirements tab, along with test automation and the Performance Center. You can also just buy the Quality Center edition (Manual testing only), or the Performance Center version (Performance Testing only)."

"If you have more than five users, a concurrent licensing model should be considered."

"I'd rate the pricing as 3/10 as it's very expensive."

"Sure, HP UFT is not free. But consider what you get for that cost: A stable product that is easy to use; the kitchen sink of technology stack support; decades of code (which in many cases actually is free); a version that is a stepping stone to an easier Selenium design; and a support base that is more that just the kindness of strangers."

"HPE has one of the most rigid, inflexible, and super expensive license models."

"We have divided our licenses between Micro Focus ALM and ALM Octane. It works for us."

"You have to pay around 50-60 euros per user."

"It is an expensive product."

"The solution is expensive."

"The license model is okay for large companies but would be quite expensive for smaller enterprises."

"If the pricing would come down and it was more affordable then we wouldn't have to switch."

"Our license for Polarion ALM is yearly. And it's not the cheapest tool that we've looked at. So if we had made our decision purely based on the licensing cost, we wouldn't have selected Polarion."

"Software for medical devices is always expensive."