We performed a comparison between Jama Connect and TFS based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Provides suitable tools for managing regulatory requirements."
"Technical support answers fairly quickly compared to others like IBM or Atlassian. They also offer quite a good knowledge base for advanced cases and how to plan it, etc. via videos that they provide. They are quite useful."
"The most valuable feature is the user-friendly interface."
"You can get full traceability with any other system. It also includes a test module, and you build the traceability matrix incrementally throughout the development process."
"Jama Connect is a good tool for the entire software development cycle."
"I like Jama Connect because it's easy to use and understand. The widgets are great, and linking is straightforward. The solution is not complex compared to its competitors."
"It is good at requirements management and test management."
"The most valuable feature is integration, particularly if you have a .NET application."
"I have found almost all of the features valuable because it integrates well with your Microsoft products. If a client is using the entire Microsoft platform, then TFS would be definitely preferable. It integrates with the digital studio development environment as well."
"From the project management perspective, the tool is efficiently managing teams by giving management information, such as reports, graphs, velocity, capacity, etc."
"It is very user-friendly."
"Since it is a robust solution, I face no performance issues. Also, considering how well the implementation process of the solution was carried out, we never faced any issues while using the solution."
"The most valuable feature is the backlog."
"The work item feature is most valuable. It allows us to store all product requirements. We can also link the test cases to those requirements so that we know which feature has already been tested, and which one is waiting for testing. We can also couple the code reviews, unit tests, and automated tests into these requirements. It is reliable. It has all the features and good performance. It also has reporting tools or analysis tools."
"Stability is okay."
"Test management can be improved. It's not so scalable. The user interface needs to split things into small projects."
"I think there's room for improvement, especially with the review process. Reviews should be integrated with requirement evaluation instead of being separate from it. The review should not run parallel to the requirement."
"t is rather slow, so the speed of the process and consuming information should be improved. It doesn't have a nice way of viewing information. We would like to see better interfaces for consuming information."
"The user interface could be modernized and the product lacks project management functionalities."
"I believe one of the weak points is the reporting side. You must export inter-readable reports from Jama if you do not use the system as a repository for your design history file. Jama is great if you keep it in Jama, but reporting out requires some customization to get it right."
"The initial setup could be better, it's complicated."
"I have inquired about pricing for this solution but have not yet heard anything, so their response time in this regard is something that should be improved."
"There are some security concerns with Jama Connect, including two-factor enablement."
"The manageability and performance of the product are areas of concern where improvements are required."
"I only use 1% of the functionality, so I am not familiar enough to know what needs to be improved."
"Access and permissions are confusing when attempting to include basic manual testing functionalities."
"The solution should have better dashboards."
"Since it is Microsoft, it is technology agnostic, thus it does not really fit into various different technologies in the organization."
"The test management interface is not very handy."
"In the next release, I would like them to include integration for various projects, similar to what JIRA has, and they could create this feature on the dashboard."
"The user interface could be improved to make it simpler and increase usability."
Jama Connect is ranked 13th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 9 reviews while TFS is ranked 3rd in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 93 reviews. Jama Connect is rated 7.4, while TFS is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Jama Connect writes "Agile, well structured, and has a great review module, which makes the design reviews smooth". On the other hand, the top reviewer of TFS writes "It is helpful for scheduled releases and enforcing rules, but it should be better at merging changes for multiple developers and retaining the historical information". Jama Connect is most compared with IBM Rational DOORS, Polarion Requirements, Jira, IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation and Helix ALM, whereas TFS is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, Jira, Rally Software, TestRail and Atlassian ALM. See our Jama Connect vs. TFS report.
See our list of best Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites vendors.
We monitor all Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites 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.