IBM DOORS Reviews

• Traceability
• Audit trail
• Configuration Management for Requirements

• Doing Impact analysis
• Producing documents
• Rich-text editing

Integration with MS Word.

I've been using it for 15 years, and am also using it alongside Rational DOORS Next Generation 6.0.

Replacing a word document is always hard.

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered.

We provide it.

It's very good.

I've tried many of them, and found that this one is the best.

It depends on the organizations size and needs.

We are a vendor and implement it for our clients.

Things are delivered to the customer on time, with less mistakes and missing features.

There are a few other requirements management tools, but none are at this level of solving complex situations.

Make sure you know your pains before starting the process.

I use DOORS for capturing a system requirement and subsystem requirement. I also use it for recording a system of architecture.

The most valuable features include:

• Traceability (the ability to link between different items)
• Configuration Management (ability to baseline things and create new views)
• User Access (to control who does what to different items)

They have recently upgraded the product. And, it is definitely more user-friendly. It was really clunky to use previously. It might not be very fancy, but it always gets the job done. 

I think it would be nice if there was better integration with other tools, particularly diagrammatic tools so that you can do things like enterprise architecture. 

It is very expensive. But, it depends on the project. The project must warrant the expense paid.

The features that I've found most valuable are organization, trace, connection to other products via external links, and DXL.

It helps us to manage and track requirements for complex products. This allows for quick and easy safety certification.

It needs word processing captioning as well as references within a module.

I've used it for 12 years.

We had no issues with deployment.

There have been no issues with stability.

It has scaled for our needs.

Customer services is great.

Technical support is also great.

We used Interleaf and other tools, but they don't allow for easily readable trace and control.

The initial setup was easy. It's easy to provide access to users.

We implemented it in-house, though it does require basic knowledge of the tool.

We've found that floating licenses work best.

Don't use Citrix or a virtual environment to implement a global solutions. It causes problems when linking between tools.

The product was being used for developing and tracking new requirements for a system we were working on. There wasn't one specific feature that comes to mind, as it was approximately 12 months ago that I was using the product to develop requirements.

The product was used to better track and structure requirements we were developing for a new product that was to be integrated into an existing system with its own requirements. It was a way for us to track new requirements and its impact on existing ones.

None comes to mind right now. I know that the group was discussing the movement towards model-based systems engineering where they were looking into alternate products that allows the integration of requirements, system diagrams, etc. all in one tool.

I used it last year, for one year.

No issues encountered,

No issues encountered,

I never had to use customer service.

I never had to use tech support,.

I am within the automotive electronics industry. The requirements management widely used in my field for change management is the key to delivering your product without any hitches. It is hard to manage requirements in a big project, therefore having a traceability feature is great.

Traceability on requirements for a huge project in an organization is a big gain.

• Traceability
• The ability to use any type of document in any format.

These features make our job easier in requirements management.  

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

I am currently working for a startup company, helping them establish the requirement engineering process. We have installed Classic DOORS, and we are satisfied with the tool. I am an IBM partner reseller, and I have many years of experience running my engineering office. I have written numerous DxL scripts for communication. I am the managing director and a mechanical engineer.

I really enjoyed the API. I developed many applications on DOORS Classic. I received the silver and platinum medals from IBM for some test management features and the DOORS exchange tool. However, not frequently. In developing and programming, I figured out that IBM's intellectual competence was not as satisfactory compared to Telelogic times. 

I recommend Classic DOORS to my clients as it is a safe and simple tool. However, many of my customers find it complicated, especially due to the auto-updating and undocumented changes by scripting inside the source code. The service during Telelogic times was much better than when IBM took over.

Compared to today, DOORS' competitors also excel in this discipline. Yet the price is too high. It's often not as generic as it used to be. IBM promised to find a way for a generic format that allows DOORS to be used in a wider range, working with applications from competitors.

I have used the solution since version 0.1.

IBM's original founder, Roger Stevens, and I are still friends. In the past, we collaborated on rollouts for the US, Britain, and DOORS for Europe, especially in Italy, France, Germany, Spain, and the Netherlands.

Positive

I recommend Classic DOORS to all my clients as an engineering office. Many customers find it complicated due to auto-updating and undocumented changes by scripting inside the source code. The service during Telelogic times was much better than it has been since IBM took over.

Over the years, the first version cost something around 5800 euros.

The all-in-all service through Telelogic times was much better than since IBM took over. It is complicated sometimes, such as the logic about updating, moving from one server version to another, and the communication between restricted and non-restricted servers. 

Especially for military clients, it's not satisfying due to the need to bring together classified and unclassified information. Telelogic times had these issues on the right track, but IBM's takeover has worsened the process. 

Many clients now use Classic DOORS for non-classified projects yet need other programs for classified ones. I would rate the overall solution five out of ten.