Codebeamer Reviews

My feedback on Codebeamer is that we are using it to store codes that are working on a functional level. Most of our employees are working in Codebeamer for the Kanban board, and we are organizing our organizational structure. For example, we have established a hierarchy from manager to manager within Codebeamer. These are the things we are doing with Codebeamer. It is working fine despite being older, and our organization prefers Codebeamer, although other people are also working with GitLab alongside it.

We are currently working with Codebeamer version 2.2. Just a few days before, we completed an update in Codebeamer, and our organization keeps updating things.

Other benefits observed from using Codebeamer include its excellent release management and access management features. For example, we have employees and some admins, and the admin can give access to others similarly to AWS. Certain features can only be performed by admins, which allows for flexible assignment. For instance, we can assign access to a developer group, enabling the entire development team to engage in tasks such as adding and pushing code.

The most valuable features of Codebeamer that I found are the release management and sprint management. In our organization, we work on a sprint basis using Agile methodology, so each sprint we declare one Kanban board in our sprint planning meeting or in retrospective, which is helpful. The Kanban board and release management are especially beneficial.

The integrations with Codebeamer have helped streamline a software development process in our company, especially as our company is developing some AI tools in a newly developed department. Recently, they needed to run some test cases and requirements on demand, and through Codebeamer, we can put the code and trigger it via the API whenever needed, allowing for on-demand runs of test cases. Most people are also storing code for specific requirements to share with others, and we are using Codebeamer as well as GitLab; some people prefer Codebeamer while others prefer GitLab.

Everyone is using Codebeamer's reporting tools, so we leverage its advanced analytics and reporting capabilities.

I feel that Codebeamer's workflow engine is working fine for me as of now, but there are better tools than Codebeamer available. Codebeamer is an old tool, and newer tools such as Jira offer a more appealing user interface. Codebeamer's UI is somewhat boring, while Jira's is more exciting and user-friendly.

Other than the user interface, I would to see improvements in Codebeamer as it appears boring. The UI has been the same for a long time, and they haven't changed anything in that regard. It should be more colorful and interactive, and easier to navigate. When I initially used Jira before coming to this company, transitioning to Codebeamer felt challenging for someone unfamiliar with it. Compared to Jira, Codebeamer can be difficult for a layperson to understand.

My experience with the technical support and customer service of Codebeamer is that whenever we face any issues, we have our internal Codebeamer expert to consult. I haven't directly communicated with the customer support team and have instead sought help from our specialist in Codebeamer.

In my opinion, Codebeamer is a stable solution. It is good in terms of stability since it's an old application that our company uses. Occasionally, I notice downtime, but I'm uncertain if it stems from our implementation or from Codebeamer's side. I often see notifications that Codebeamer is down for several hours.

Regarding scalability, I believe it should be easier to adapt to growing needs. It should come with documentation that is accessible for users, especially for newcomers who might not have any prior knowledge. If some documentation exists, I'm not aware of it, but it is essential for new users to have a guide to follow.

My experience with the technical support and customer service of Codebeamer is that whenever we face any issues, we have our internal Codebeamer expert to consult. I haven't directly communicated with the customer support team and have instead sought help from our specialist in Codebeamer.

Codebeamer has helped us gain insights into our project's performance and health by making it easier during our PI planning or sprint planning sessions. When we know what needs to be developed or tested, it is easy to assign tasks or input them into the backlog. However, when end users or customers raise new requests or tickets, it becomes challenging to estimate time or assignments. Codebeamer is helpful in this scenario because we can use the Kanban board to post tickets, allowing whoever has the capacity or knowledge to pull the ticket and work on it, which I feel is a good feature. I rate Codebeamer 8 out of 10.

We work with Codebeamer, and we exclusively use Codebeamer in our processes.

Within R&D, Codebeamer works quite well for improving team collaboration, but for non-R&D functions, we have to do some work to persuade them to use Codebeamer as well.

The best features I find in Codebeamer are the integration of everything.

The most valuable aspect is the integration with third-party tools, as we don't have to use different tools to start from the stakeholder requirements down to subsystems. The whole requirement elicitation, the system engineering, systems requirements, subsystem requirements, and test management can all be done in one tool, including issue management, which I consider the biggest asset.

Within R&D, Codebeamer works quite well for improving team collaboration, but for non-R&D functions, we have to do some work to persuade them to use Codebeamer as well.

I would like to improve the speed of Codebeamer, and what I believe is lacking is a way to define or set up role-specific user interfaces. Codebeamer is a very powerful tool, but the experienced user who knows the business model defined and implemented in Codebeamer might find it less overwhelming compared to the normal user, who doesn't know what to do with it all or how to find the right downstream elements, so it would be really useful to have a more customizable interface.

Since I was not involved in the initial setup of Codebeamer, what I understand is that we struggle with transporting settings in templates to the existing projects, and I think the tools for rollout management have some room for improvement.

What is really disappointing is that some features which have been promised for years are still not mature enough to use. The so-called working sets and the interface to Pure Variants, which PTC has now acquired, are part of this disappointment.

In terms of additional features I would like to see in the next release of Codebeamer to make it better, I wish for more speed, working sets, and a working interface to Pure System and Pure Variants.

I have been working with Codebeamer for three to four years, and we were using it before it was bought by PTC.

We struggle with transporting settings in templates to the existing projects, and I think the tools for rollout management have some room for improvement.

I don't work with Jira anymore, as I'm currently focused on other products.

I was not involved in the initial setup of Codebeamer. What I understand is that we struggle with transporting settings in templates to the existing projects, and I think the tools for rollout management have some room for improvement.

While we use Codebeamer's risk management features, this is the least known feature for me. I know that they use it for risk, and sometimes I have to work with it, but it's quite isolated from the requirement management or test management, which I believe are much more important.

I don't deal with prices regarding Codebeamer as it's not my business.

I would recommend Codebeamer to other companies.

On a scale of one to ten, I rate Codebeamer an eight.

I find Codebeamer to be best suited for automotive projects in various automotive companies. It is very economical for medium-sized companies. It finds use cases in small, medium, and large enterprises. However, I strongly recommend it for medium companies.

The key features of Codebeamer include templates and basic structures, most of which are created and readily available for deployment out of the box, reducing deployment time. Additionally, its integration capability is very high, with almost eighty to eighty-five percent of integrations available readily out of the box, minimizing the need for specific integration-related work.

One improvement could be to reduce the system or server requirements. For a client with a medium configuration server, Codebeamer did not work initially until the system was upgraded. Additionally, the drag-and-drop feature has some bugs, as I identified two to three scenarios where it did not work. For tagging or traceability, I cannot update changes in bulk. If terminology changes, modifications must be done manually or by exporting the document to Word or Excel, which is time-consuming.

I have been using Codebeamer for almost six years.

Codebeamer is mostly stable. The performance might slow down if many applications are running together on a single server with Codebeamer. However, running it independently or with a bigger server generally doesn't cause any issues.

Scalability is not an issue. In a project, I have experienced up to 180 licenses running during peak times and as low as ten licenses during downtime without facing upgrade or downgrade issues.

The customer support for Codebeamer is good. I usually receive responses to my emails within 24 hours, and if I raise an issue as high priority, I receive responses in six to eight hours.

Positive

The deployment is straightforward and not a big challenge. Typically, one person is sufficient for deployment within a week, and the project can be kicked off within that time frame, which is normal in my industry.

The solution has produced a return on investment. It has made the certification process much easier and more straightforward.

The solution is fairly priced.

Currently, I have not seen much AI integration into Codebeamer, but I would like to see features related to code traceability, requirement tagging, and missing requirement highlights in future updates. I rate my overall experience with Codebeamer as close to eight out of ten.

Positive

We are using Codebeamer and the whole V-model for requirement change, task management, and issue management.

The primary challenge is adapting the standard product to our workflows and specific needs. We are currently working on or have challenges to solve with PTC. Codebeamer is user-friendly, but we have issues with some specific topics.

I have been using Codebeamer for two years. We are customers and responsible for test management. We are formulating what we want to have in our test management.

Technical support is good.

I recommend the solution.

Overall, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

We use CodeBeamer to understand tools and map all the business requirements.

During migrations from other platforms to CodeBeamer, there have been instances where we encountered issues that required redoing certain tasks.

We have been using Codebeamer for three to four years.

Our experience with customer support service has been good. They were able to answer most of our questions.

In my current company, we previously used multiple tools for requirement management, test management, and tracking, such as Arvines, a hardware list for test management, and Jira for tracking purposes. However, these tools were part of a segregated environment, and management decided to upgrade them due to their outdated functionalities. Consequently, my team and I evaluated various tools for requirement management and chose CodeBeamer for its flexibility. We found it is more adaptable to our organization's needs and processes, making it a suitable choice for our migration efforts. During the evaluation process, we considered features compatibility with our business processes and flexibility to accommodate changes. This aspect was crucial to minimizing adjustment time and ensuring a smooth transition to the new tool.

Basic installation took minimal time. The setup of the staging environment within the organization was rapid, allowing our team to start using it promptly.

The platform provided the flexibility to expand our business processes, accommodating or altering them to suit the requirements of a changing environment. Additionally, its flow management capabilities are really good. The out-of-the-box reporting feature is decent.

I rate it a seven out of ten.

We use Codebeamer to manage software in our automobile business, for entire project management, and the CI/CD cycle.

Codebeamer's API-based integration and many other integration aspects with other solutions are very powerful.

It would be helpful if Codebeamer's overall processing and integration with software like Jira could be improved.

I have been using Codebeamer for more than one year.

I rate Codebeamer ten out of ten for stability.

I rate Codebeamer ten out of ten for scalability.

We are satisfied with the solution’s technical support.

Positive

I rate Codebeamer a nine out of ten for the ease of its initial setup.

It took two weeks for two people to deploy Codebeamer in our organization.

Codebeamer is not a cheap solution. On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive, I rate the solution's pricing an eight out of ten.

Before choosing Codebeamer, we evaluated PTC Integrity. We chose Codebeamer because it is a much better and upcoming solution.

I would recommend Codebeamer to other users because it is a good and upcoming ALM tool that is continuously improving.

Overall, I rate Codebeamer a nine out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for lifecycle management, or ALM, including task management and HR planning.

I like the integration with everything.

The solution is stable.

It's easy to set up.

There is a lot of complexity involved, meaning it can do many things, which can be quite useful.

There are a lot of bits and pieces that need to be improved. It's like a teenager. It's no longer a startup, yet not mature yet. It's still a fairly new tool that lacks maturity right now. For example, if you compared it to Jira, which is more mature, you can see that some things are done better due to the fact that Jira is older.

It needs better integration for office documents, et cetera. There could be more user-friendly integration between office documents and requirements. 

Users might say the UI is complex, however, the solution covers so many items, you need to accept the complexity. It's an in-depth solution. For some people, it may be better to have special setups to set up the GUI to show only specific items to make it simpler. 

It would be nice to have some sort of mash-up GUI, which is possible in Jira so that we can customize to roles specific to, for example, problem management, testers, et cetera. They should have their own GUI related to their roles. 

I've been using the solution for one year.

The solution is stable and reliable. I'd rate it ten out of ten. There are no bugs or glitches. 

So far, the solution has been scalable and has met our needs. 

We're an enterprise-level company.

I've had some meetings with technical support about dedicated features, however, I've never contacted them for troubleshooting issues. 

I previously used Jira Portfolio. It was a more mature product.

The initial setup was straightforward. I'm not an IT person so I did not take part in the direct implementation. I'm not sure how long it took.

The solution was set up internally, most likely. 

I don't deal with the pricing or licensing. I don't know what the cost is. 

I'm an end-user. 

I'm not sure which version of the solution I am currently using. 

This solution isn't as mature as other options.

I'd advise users to implement it if they want a fully integrated system. Stick to their philosophy. If you follow too closely with processes from old legacy products, you may run into trouble. It's best to instead lose your old habits and follow the codeBeamer approach. Don't handle the replacement of tools like Doors or Jira alone. This solution can cover more. That's the strength of the product. You need to dig into it a bit and see what else it can do. You need to embrace the complexity to a certain level. That might be a difficulty for some, however, that is the strength as well. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. 

In my experience, CodeBeamer has been essential for digitizing and managing complex development processes. Its strong requirements management tools have greatly improved our workflow.

One of the most valuable features of Codebeamer is its strong performance, especially as the volume of materials increases. The tool's usability is good, although there's always room for improvement. I appreciate the flexibility of using templates tailored to the company or industry, as starting with the right template can significantly enhance the description of processes. While templates may not always be perfect, they play a significant role, contributing to about 80% of the overall effectiveness.

Certain areas in Codebeamer could be improved, like addressing small issues, glitches, or bugs. Making the platform more open for users would be beneficial, allowing for a richer user experience. Transparency in marketing and clearer communication of the tool's advantages could also be enhanced. From a management perspective, it is crucial to highlight the asset management capabilities, which are valuable for those dealing with budgets.

I have been working with Codebeamer since 2021.

It is generally a stable product with occasional glitches.

The scalability of the product is good.

I found the initial setup of CodeBeamer to be a bit complex. The challenge is in establishing a backbone that considers software, cybersecurity, and their connections to hardware and other components. The existing documentation isn't always clear on these aspects, making it challenging to ensure compliance with automotive standards. To build a solid foundation following a V-model approach, it is crucial to have comprehensive and unified templates. Currently, the tool seems to lack a straightforward representation of its capabilities in addressing these specific automotive requirements.

Overall, I would rate Codebeamer as an right out of ten.