OpenText ALM / Quality Center Reviews

Allows us to do defect resolution from logging to resolution. It gives us an overview of all the defects and prioritization for resolution.

The dashboard was not working at first. Later on, it was difficult to customize it.

We have used it on and off for over four years.

All types of data can be seen in one place.

• Real-time insight into what’s going on.
• Helps us work aligned with reality.

It's doing what it should do, but it's a little bit costly. I would like to see some kind of testing analytics.

Stability is good; no problems.

So far, we have not had any scalability problems.

I was involved in the setup. It is an out-of-the-box, simple installation. Now we're doing data migration to the database. We are just reading the manual, but more people are involved. This is a normal process.

Start slowly.

When selecting a vendor, the most important criteria for me are that they are trustworthy and nearby.

The integration with MS Excel, test suite upload feature, Document builder and the test run process.

Helps in providing an archive of test suites for easy regression.

Also helps to keep track of the time spent on test executions, and defect management.

Two years plus.

The Client was needed in our network environment because the Web GUI was found to be unstable.

The client crashes every so often, but only when left idle for a while.

Majority of the tests done by my company are manual so QC serves majorly as a depository for our client.

* 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.

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.

• 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.