OpenText ALM / Quality Center Reviews

• Dashboard
• Reporting
• Version control
• Requirements Management
• Test Lab
• Defect tracking and management

Easier Test Lab management and defect life-cycle tracking, which is useful during triage calls.

Quality Center has definitely added value as it has easy accessibility for all our employees and is very useful for defect triage and scrum meetings.

• Include project planning and tracking
• Include defect sharing
• There are a lot of features in ALM which should be implemented into Quality Center, especially as ALM and Quality Center are integrated.
  

I've used it for six years.

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered.

Customer Service:

9/10

Technical Support:

8/10

We previously used Bugzilla and switched because Quality Center is easier to use, has good reporting, and has better accessibility.

Initial setup was straightforward.

We implemented it in-house.

100%

There are many free-ware tools available, which you can try.

• Bugzilla
• JIRA

It is an application lifecycle management product for IT projects. It is powerful to manage the requirement traceability, coverage, test case design, mapping, test execution, defect tracking, reporting.

A little slow Agile model support not very good

• Entering requirements and mapping of requirements with test cases.
• Writing and execution of test cases and reporting defects.
• Generating customized reports.

Our organization has developed a product for automating test cases and we track the test cases' automation status with HPE ALM. It includes a column which made it easy to track them.

It needs a feature for scheduling of automation scripts to run automatically. This feature would be very useful.

Five years.

No.

No.

Quick response.

We checked out other tools like JIRA and Rally which also have good features, but HPE ALM has is user friendly.

Straightforward.

No suggestions.

No.

As long as you can afford it, go for this product. Otherwise, there are less expensive or open source products with almost the same features.

• Reporting
• Dashboard
• Traceability
• Application Lifecycle Management

The tool has increased the collaboration between different teams.

Some improvement to the Requirements Management are needed.

I've used it for five years along with HP Quality Center Enterprise Edition v10.

No issues encountered.

No, it's a very stable product.

No issues encountered.

Customer Service:

8//10.

Technical Support:

7/10.

We switched because the previous solution was lacking features to manage a complete life-cycle.

Very simple setup.

We used a vendor who were 10/10.

11 months.

Varies.

For us this was the complete choice.

Use iy out of the box and utilize built in features.

We use this solution for an Avionic System to test for integration and verification with real and simulated hardware.

By using QC we broke down silos (of teams), improved the organization of our tests, have a much better view of the testing status, and became much quicker in providing test results with document generation.

The automated document generation provides the ability to perform tests within one day of our flight test readiness reviews. In the past, the timespan was several weeks.

We would like to have support for agile development. As we do not have this capability, we are now investigating the use of Octane.

Five years.

You can plan your test execution very thoroughly with configurations and setups in the test lab. This is very unique in comparison with other tools.

To add test cases from the test plan in test lab, the filtering function is not very user-friendly. Comparing the functionality with the querying/filtering functionality from TFS, which is much more user-friendly, it is clearer and the default screen is almost full-sized,

Two years.

No.

No.

I do not know.

I have worked at other companies, I cannot choose between solutions.

No, I was not the admin of this application, and the setup itself is not complex, nor very straightforward (but somewhere in the middle).

I would not recommend this product If you have a small organization, which would not use this tool very often.

The pricing is very expensive, but it covers a full solution, which means, you will use a lot of functionalities and gain in time and efficiency.

No.

The report feature has helped me to generate a quality index report which is a critical report for management decisions. The report is generated monthly.

There are many reports that are generated monthly from the tools which assist us in making key decisions concerning the quality of software and products.

The product creates a database per project and this results in poor disk space management, as well as frequent backup and restore. This should be improved upon.

We have been using this solution for four years.

There were no issues with stability.

There were no issues with scalability.

Technical support is good.

We did not use a different solution previously.

The initial setup was straightforward.

I suggest organizations should attempt cloud services.

We did not evaluate other options before this one.

It is a good product, but it still requires customization.

From a testing point of view, it takes us a step closer to automation. Our testing is quite manual at the moment. We can use it from start to finish; from testing business requirements right through user acceptance testing, load testing, and performance testing. That's a positive feature.

It has dramatically reduced the number of defects that go into production. There have been no serious outages, nor serious problems where we had to do a rollback or anything like that. The transition into production has been very smooth.

From a tool point of view, I would like see some integration into release management. That is the biggest pain point at this moment.

We bought this solution three years ago.

From a performance point of view, stability is very good.

ALM has not directly assisted scalability. I wouldn't say ALM assists with scalability at all.

I haven’t used technical support, but my team has. I don't know about their experience with them, but if they were not satisfied, I would have found out about it.

Don’t just focus on the technology and buying it, but rather focus on the processes behind the support of the technology. That was our biggest lesson.