OpenText ALM / Quality Center Reviews

The Defect Module helps the project team to track the defects in a structured and manageable way until defects closure.

Helps in terms of managing defects easily.

The technical support from the vendor is weak, as I believe the back end script support for the tool is not easy to access and modify by the customer.

12 years.

So far fine.

Not good.

No.

It depends on which version. The upgrade from version 9 to version 11 was not a straightforward upgrade because the whole platform changed. So the upgrade was a manual project and it took the organization a few months to upgrade all thousand projects.

Depends on company direction.

No.

Compare with other test management tools to see their benefits. We did compare with JIRA. Every tool has its own pros and cons. It depends on the organization's needs.

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.

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

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.

• Test Plan section to capture test cases
• Test Lab to run those test cases 
• The built-in defect management tool

It's helped in formalizing and adding structure to what was up to that point in time a series of checklists that were not version controlled. Also, test results were not rigorously reported back to the internal customer(s).

Report generation needs to be simplified.

I used it for roughly a year on a contract.

I did not choose this product. It was onsite before I started the contract with this particular client. I have seen and used this product at a few client sites.

I did not choose this product, it was onsite before I started the contract with this particular client, and I have seen and used this product at a few client sites.

I was already used to setting up the directory-like structure in Test Plan.

An in-house team performed implementation as needed.

• Test Plan
• Test Lab
• Defects tracking and management

Managing the test cases and defects tracking are the most valuable features, which we use daily.

I like all the features and can't think of anything that needs improving.

I've been using it for eight years.

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered.

Nowadays, all companies are looking for free software, and for this reason, many companies are developing their own tools similar to Quality Center and using that tool instead. License costs have a direct effect on the ROI of the company.

It's an excellent tool.

The ability to keep test cases and defects centrally located, accessible to multiple people instead of in document format, is the most valuable feature.

We no longer need to use documents for test cases, which are brittle and difficult to keep updated.

• The UI is primitive
• The tool is hard to learn
• The help files are minimal, even the videos
• The massive configuration options are too broad, meaning there is little in common across deployments

I've used it for a few months, but I also have experience with Quality Center, the predecessor.

I wasn't involved in the deployment.

The site has to be reloaded every time there is a change in the background.

No issues encountered.

It was complex, as I was not given permission to delete items, for example. Trying to create test cases via copy-and-paste can be cumbersome, and it was easy to misread the directory structure or put cases in the wrong location.

I believe that the tool is probably not worth great expense, although it is better than remaining tied to documents and spreadsheets.

Try MS Test Manager first, particularly if your code is .Net and/or your developers use Visual Studio.