IBM DOORS vs IBM DOORS Next comparison

IBM DOORS and IBM DOORS Next are both solutions in the Application Requirements Management category. IBM DOORS is ranked #1 with an average rating of 8.1, while IBM DOORS Next is ranked #5 with an average rating of 7.7. IBM DOORS holds a 34.7% mindshare in ARM, compared to IBM DOORS Next’s 8.0% mindshare. Additionally, 90% of IBM DOORS users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 91% of IBM DOORS Next users who would recommend it.

IBM DOORS

Read 53 IBM DOORS reviews

8,909 Views
5,943 Comparison Views

90% willing to recommend

IBM DOORS Next

Read 12 IBM DOORS Next reviews

4,209 Views
1,346 Comparison Views

91% willing to recommend

IBM DOORS

IBM DOORS Next

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between IBM DOORS and IBM DOORS Next based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Application Requirements Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.

To learn more, read our detailed IBM DOORS vs. IBM DOORS Next Report (Updated: October 2024).

Buyer's Guide

IBM DOORS vs. IBM DOORS Next

October 2024

Download the complete report

Helped 816,406 peers since 2012

Categories and Ranking

IBM DOORS

Ranking in Application Requirements Management

1st

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

IBM DOORS Next

Ranking in Application Requirements Management

5th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Application Requirements Management category, the mindshare of IBM DOORS is 34.7%, up from 34.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM DOORS Next is 8.0%, up from 7.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Application Requirements Management

Featured Reviews

MarioCataldi

Senior Consultant Bip - Business Integration Partners at Business Integration Partners

Offers ability to automate tasks and to track changes within documents and compare different versions of requirements but modeling capabilities could benefit from a web-based tool

The biggest improvement for me is definitely the ability to use DOORS in a web environment through Rational DOORS Next Generation. Integrating with Rational Team Concert via the web interface has also been beneficial. However, not all Rational Team Concert operations are available from the web client. Certain operations, like creating streams or components, still require using the desktop application. They're not accessible through the web interface. And in my opinion, this limitation should be removed. Creating streams, components, etc. We still need the desktop app for those. DOORS has enabled flexibility in mapping requirements to the software. Tracking changes over time due to team meetings and other factors is important. Additionally, I've been using DOORS Next Generation, the web-based tool, especially in the last year.

Read full review

Roger Trackwell

System Engineering Manager at a wholesaler/distributor with 10,001+ employees

An industry-leading tool to demonstrate traceability between requirements, with valuable features for tailoring modules and managing several thousand requirements

The biggest thing is that it shows cradle to grave traceability between the initial parent requirement and the lowest level, or what we call a CID, a critical item development spec. You can establish your verification plans in DOORS, and then as you get test results, you can put them in DOORS as a link or as a pointer to where that specific test resides on a company database. Then you can also write compliance rationale and add a column for coding, like pass, fail, green, yellow, red, meets, does not meet, partially meets, or whatever scoring criteria you want to use. Like I said, the best thing about it is that it provides you that visibility of your verification, allowing you to know how close you are to your pre-production activities, prototyping, go ahead, or whatever it is.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros

"Starting to use the solution is pretty straightforward. There isn't too much of a learning curve."

"I like the way we can simply link requirements with one another and with test descriptions and then automatically produce reports that are required to show compliance to our customers. It is a combination of requirements management and reporting that I like, but I really have very little to do with the reporting part of it. I don't know how easy or hard it is to create those reports."

"It's a very interesting tool. I like that it's simple. You have to create your document, add your templates, and have your headings and definitions, and it's done. You must attribute the discipline and fill out the comment field for requirements. It also provides you with unique IDs for each requirement. I like that it never duplicates IDs."

"The traceability matrix in DOORS improved our project outcomes. It helps ensure coverage of requirements at different levels, from user requirements to software requirements to test requirements."

"Makes good work of prioritizing and planning product delivery."

"IBM DOORS has a well-refined ASPICE template"

"It is very customizable and easy to scale."

"The data logs are ver conveneint."

More IBM DOORS pros

"There are many good features with DOORS. The solution has a concept of streams and baselines, as well as a concept of components. A component is a subproject inside a project."

"The tool's most valuable feature is displaying requirements in a tabular format. This means you can see everything laid out in columns and rows. It is more aesthetic compared to other tools. The traceability matrix helps to view things better. It comes with different linking rules."

"My company contacts the solution's technical support, and they are good and responsive."

"IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation is easier to expand to build a backend with several servers, so you can also use it to scale up to several hundreds of users without major problems."

"As far as maintaining our requirements so that we can have copies of them, it's good. I can print it out if necessary."

"The "Link by Attribute" feature is useful for making links without needing to use the web interface manually."

"The most valuable features are the versioning of requirements and the possibility to reuse them."

"The most valuable features are the baselines and links."

More IBM DOORS Next pros

Cons

"It would be helpful if Microsoft provided a more user-friendly interface for updating and querying updates. Additionally, if there was a way for users to notify developers of any changes in requirements, it would allow for faster and more efficient updates to the solution's architecture. This could be in the form of a notification system that alerts developers of any changes that need to be made. Additionally, the solution is document-driven and it should be more digital."

"I would like to see them improve in agile management the Scrum/Kanban Board to work with overseas team members."

"There are problems with communicating between DOORS and Microsoft Office."

"The software and GUI is very outdated."

"It could be more user-friendly. It's not a beautiful tool. The user interface is gray. It has only lists inside, and it's horrible when you want to add tables. It's tough to add tables and manage them. It also becomes difficult when you want to add images."

"It's difficult to set the code on the solution."

"Both the performance and the price could be improved."

"IBM should integrate some solutions they already own toenhance the utility of the product further. Specifically import and export to Office products is more difficult than it needs to be."

More IBM DOORS cons

"Be very careful how you load your DNG server. There are limits to the number of artifacts a server can handle."

"It does have a tendency to condense the requirements. It kind of puts them in a tree format. Sometimes those trees are a little difficult."

"Both the data storage and reporting for this solution need improvement."

"I have come to the conclusion that if you are considering migrating from DOORS to DNG, don't! Instead of spending 100's to 1000's of hours doing migrations, invest those hours in a DXL programmer to make DOORS do what it isn't doing for you now."

"When you are not working on it every day it is not very intuitive."

"When you are in Jira or Confluence, you have some freedom in how you type in text. That's also a weakness of Confluence, however, as it opens the doors to sloppy work. In DOS Next Generation, the text is very rigorous, but it might be difficult for people who don't have the discipline. Having a way to quickly enter requirements could help. It might already be in there, but I don't know. I don't have enough experience with the tool yet."

"The only additional feature would be if it had dynamic linking to other MBSE tool sets or industry-leading tools."

"It offers a bad user experience and the usability is poor."

More IBM DOORS Next cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We have to pay for a license. I think it's a one-time payment as my company hasn't notified me about more charges. I don't think it's expensive for large corporations, but it will be costly for an average person."

"I am not sure why it is so expensive, but one license will cost approximately $15,000 in US dollars."

"Pricing can vary depending on the size of the organization and how contracts are negotiated."

"It's expensive."

"The licensing costs for the product are quite high."

"IBM Rational DOORS is highly expensive."

"I would rate the pricing a seven out of ten, with one being very affordable and ten being quite expensive."

"IBM DOORS is available at a reasonable price"

More IBM DOORS pricing and cost advice

"If the product price were not reasonable enough, our company would not use IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation."

"The price of this solution is very high, and it increases year after year."

"Users can buy a three-year license for about 12,000 Euros."

"The cost of maintenance is €20,000 to €30,000 ($22,000 to $33,000 USD) and there are no additional fees."

"You are going to need a beefy server and a fat network pipe to it in order to make DNG and its companion tools work well for users."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Requirements Management solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

25%

Computer Software Company

13%

Aerospace/Defense Firm

Government

Manufacturing Company

22%

Computer Software Company

Aerospace/Defense Firm

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about IBM Rational DOORS?

The traceability matrix in DOORS improved our project outcomes. It helps ensure coverage of requirements at different levels, from user requirements to software requirements to test requirements.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM Rational DOORS?

The price of IBM DOORS depends upon the pricing models and the licenses the user selects. The product, on average, starts at $134/month. IBM DOORS is available at a reasonable price.

See all answers

What needs improvement with IBM Rational DOORS?

IBM DOORS effectively synchronizes with Polarion. But suppose when Polarion is running on Linux and you want to integrate with IBM DOORS on Windows, that is when compatibility issues arise. For the...

See all answers

What do you like most about IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation?

The tool's most valuable feature is displaying requirements in a tabular format. This means you can see everything laid out in columns and rows. It is more aesthetic compared to other tools. The tr...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation?

I cannot discuss the product's price since it is meant to be confidential and kept between our company and IBM. If the product price were not reasonable enough, our company would not use IBM Ration...

See all answers

What needs improvement with IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation?

IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation has room for improvement compared to other tools like Polaris and Jama Connect. These tools offer more flexibility and options for developers, which IBM Rational ...

See all answers

Comparisons

Polarion Requirements vs IBM DOORS

Compared 27% of the time

Jira vs IBM DOORS

Compared 26% of the time

Jama Connect vs IBM DOORS

Compared 17% of the time

Helix ALM vs IBM DOORS

Compared 8% of the time

PTC Integrity Requirements Connector vs IBM DOORS

Compared 6% of the time

More IBM DOORS Competitors

Jama Connect vs IBM DOORS Next

Compared 23% of the time

Polarion Requirements vs IBM DOORS Next

Compared 16% of the time

Jira vs IBM DOORS Next

Compared 15% of the time

Helix ALM vs IBM DOORS Next

Compared 3% of the time

3SL Cradle vs IBM DOORS Next

Compared 3% of the time

More IBM DOORS Next Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

IBM DOORS

November 2024

Download IBM DOORS product report

Buyer's Guide

IBM DOORS Next

November 2024

Download IBM DOORS Next product report

Also Known As

Rational DOORS

Rational DOORS Next Generation, RDNG, Rational Requirements Composer and IBM RRC

Learn More

IBM

Overview

IBM Engineering Requirements Management DOORS (DOORS) is a Requirements Management (RM) software designed to help organizations manage engineering project requirements throughout the development lifecycle. It provides a central location for capturing, defining, and organizing project requirements, facilitating communication and collaboration among stakeholders like engineers, system designers, and customers. Key features include requirements traceability, version control, and impact analysis, ensuring effective implementation and testing. DOORS improves efficiency, enhances communication, reduces risks, and supports better decision-making through clear visibility into requirements. Compared to its newer, web-based counterpart DOORS Next, the mature DOORS 9 offers a wider range of features with a traditional user interface but lacks web-based functionality and modern integration with IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) tools.

IBM Engineering Requirements Management DOORS Next (DOORS Next) is a requirements management (RM) software designed to help organizations manage engineering project requirements throughout the development lifecycle. It offers a central location for capturing, defining, and organizing project requirements, facilitating collaboration among stakeholders like engineers, system designers, and customers. Key features include requirements traceability, version control, and impact analysis. DOORS Next improves efficiency, enhances communication, reduces risks, and aids in better decision-making through clear traceability and version control. Compared to its predecessor, DOORS 9, DOORS Next is a web-based version with a modern interface that integrates with other IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) tools, while DOORS 9 offers a wider range of features in a non-web-based format.

Sample Customers

Infosys, Chevrolet Volt

Major health insurer

Buyer's Guide

IBM DOORS vs. IBM DOORS Next

October 2024

Free Report: IBM DOORS vs. IBM DOORS Next

Find out what your peers are saying about IBM DOORS vs. IBM DOORS Next and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.

DOWNLOAD NOW

816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our IBM DOORS vs. IBM DOORS Next report.

See our list of best Application Requirements Management vendors.

We monitor all Application Requirements Management reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.