OpenText ALM / Quality Center Reviews

Defect management, because it has allowed me to manage the defects throughout its lifecycle (from being opened to its resolution – closed); who is assigned to it and working on it, what are the issues, and why it is being held up. It gave valuable metrics.

It forced different parties to collaborate better. It gave a lot of information to team members, also additional information to stakeholders in the defect summary, and items to highlight, when needed.

At the time, the dashboard never really worked.

Three to five years.

Yes, there was a problem in stability when the number of test cases grew at a very fast pace. Adding more memory, backup, and restore remedied the instability.

I can’t remember any.

On a scale of one to 10: five.

Yes, it was forced on the company. Change was to facilitate management of defects between multiple parties.

It was straightforward because the test manager was consulted on how to go about setting it up.

It is very pricey. To be fair, it is geared for enterprise use. Unless the company and the decision maker (who would say “yes” to paying for it) is convinced on benefits of the product, it is not a go. Medium businesses would not buy into it.

Do the cost benefit analysis, and understand how the product/tool is a solution rather than a nice-to-have because it is flashy. It should fit the organization’s size and needs.

I have used HPE ALM before and the feature which I loved the most is the ability to create Excel reports and inject macros to format your exported file/report.

Tests and test flows are organized properly.

Notifications to developers/testers is also a plus!

Probably more fields to customize.

Almost nine years, and I've been working it for 10 years now.

I have no experience setting up the server. I have only been an admin.

The product is pretty stable.

No.

Customer Service:

Customer service is good. They respond on time to inquiries and requests.

Technical Support:

The technical guys at HPE are good and knowledgeable on the solutions provided.

I have no experience using other test management softwares.

Initial setup is complex when you want to customize the product.

In-house.

We didn't look through the ROI of using this product. We look more into the ROI of automated tests.

Pricing is high compared to other solutions.

We're looking into using JIRA, but skills-wise we have more resources which are knowledgeable in using HPE ALM.

I personally found the defect tracking feature very useful in my ongoing project. Our complete Agile process of Software development and QA is dependent HPE Quality Center.

It has streamlined communication with business users and technical users whereby business requirements are now tracked on HPE Quality Center.

Thus, providing clarity with simplicity.

I've faced a couple of bugs in the product whereby we were not able to open attachments on a particular ticket.

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

I've been using this solution for close to two years on a daily basis, and it's a wonderful product.

Not in particular, only certain defects that I've mentioned for the question above regarding areas for improvement.

Certain minor issues such as error in opening attachments linked to a ticket and session timeout issues apart, otherwise the product is stable.

The product is scalable and consistently delivers the required purpose.

Customer Service:

HPE has dedicated support with this licensed product and they were available for any queries.

Technical Support:

Technical issues were resolved based on SR with HP team and the response was good.

We have used HPE QC from the onset as the scale of our operation and the throughput of requirements were greater so using other solutions, such as Kanban, were not feasible in our project.

Initial setup was straightforward with installation and HPE provides tutorials for advanced modification.

It was implemented by our client team and we helped them with the offshore installation.

The value created was high in our project as were dealing with an application with high public exposure, so the smooth working of tracking requirements and defects definitely gave a good ROI.

For pricing, I recommend to buy a bundled package. Check the HPE site for more details.

Other teams had used Kanban and its visual style of quality control, but it was not a good fit in our project.

I highly recommend HPE Quality Center for its simplicity and ease of use whereby Business and Technical teams can see each other's progress and help make better decisions.

* Flexible licensing (In-house hosting or Cloud-based). * High capacity. Have heard of two Telco clients who have up to 4,000 licenses each. * Easy to use * Highly customizable * Can be integrated with a variety of automation tools * Can be integrated with a variety of Requirements Management tools * Can be integrated with a variety of Defect Tracking tools * Can store pretty much all testing artifacts (requirements, test cases, defects, automation scripts, and miscellaneous files) * Good linking between requirements, defects and test cases * New version of Quality Center comes with an advanced test case runner called "HP Sprinter". * Highly customizable reporting (now uses VBA for formatting reports) * Good technical support from HP and specialized consulting firms * Lots of new features being rolled out by HP including Business Process Testing (BPT) module which is at the cutting edge of testing (manual and automation wise) * HP is also adding new features for Total Application Lifecycle Management (including Performance Testing Module, Project Tracking Module, etc)

* High licensing cost. * The Version Control feature is still quite primitive.

• Ability to hierarchically group test cases
• Ability to reuse test cases (call test from a test)
• Ability to organise under trees test sets
• Ability to monitor everything
• Create a report under everything
• Ability to configure custom attributes on all modules

• Allows us to allocate tests among multiple test members
• Provides us with live metrics and control
• Provides an audit of progress and issue
• Given us the ability to maintain decently a regression pool of test cases

It needs compatibility with browsers other than IE.

I've used it for more than eight years.

Sometimes it has tricky errors, but rarely.

Sometimes, it has performance issues at some points, but this all depends on a million different things.

Customer Service:

It is a very close community, and luckily there are a lot of posts.

Technical Support:

I've not had any direct contact with them.

No previous solution was used.

We've never calculated it.

This is for big software houses, so costs and especially yearly renewal of support is very very expensive.

No other options were evaluated.

Be organised, as the tool has the abilities to support this.