OpenText Application Quality Management Reviews

A comprehensive solution aiming for total Test management. It has bindings with HP QTP which is a test automation tool. With the addition of BPT (Business Process Testing), QC along with QTP has been the choice for test automation in most of the IT businesses.

Maintenance of test artifacts becomes messy when there are many scripts and supporting test artifacts. HP QC makes it easier to maintain the scripts and also organize them into various business areas.

Backup strategy is lacking in QC. Once the QC server crashes, all your automation artifacts are unrecoverable. Though we can create QC project files to create a backup, there is size limitation when you restore the backup.

4 years and 6 months

Configuration of QC contains a number of steps which could be made simpler. Many of these settings can be default with an option for the user to change them.

Getting to the root cause of any issue with QC is difficult. In many cases, restoring the QC projects is the way to resolve issues. Though HP support is available, it is not immediate.

As with the scalability, there are no issues with QC. It handles multiple connections very easily. And also if there is a crash on one machine where one test artifact is locked, the lock is automatically released in some time. But it would be great if there was recovery options built in after a crash.

The technical support is prompt and understand business urgency.

I have worked on TFS. The features of TFS are limited when compared to QC.

The initial setup was pretty straightforward.

• End-to-End traceability - Request>Test>Result>Defect
• Versioning
• Reporting (since v11 when it uses Word templates)

• Added electronic signature functionality (in-house dev)
• Controlled changes to data allow for validated processes in a regulated environment (record workflow)

• Reporting
• Drill-up, drill-down works sort-of OK
• Multi-project reporting
• User-friendliness, it requires some time to get used to

I've been using it since 2004, when it was known as Mercury Test Director.

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered.

7/10.

8/10.

No previous solution used.

It's simple, but customization adopting for a regulated environment is complex as it requires 15,000 lines of code.

It was done in-house.

Review if the all-to-be licensed functionality is needed as certain modules are not used as they introduce needless complexity. You should aim for concurrent licensing if global us is needed as slack periods in one time-zone can be picked up by another.

No other options were evaluated, we just upgraded from Test Director>Quality Center>ALM, and we are planning to upgrade from v11 to v12.

ALM/Quality Center is expensive, but it has its value and, in certain cases, the Enterprise edition is way too much, but it is very stable and reliable. You should review v12 Webclient solution for requirements management.

• Traceability
• Ability to reuse test cases
• Reports

We now know more about how to test.

Import Library - Synchronization problems are often because the ALM interconnection with HP Solution Manager is too fragile.

I've been using it for six years.

We had a problem with the consultant.

Not really. Our big problem is that our in-house support of Solution Manager is not compatible. It's not a fault with the product.

For migration from v10 to v11, we needed to convert manually each project because the HP consultant, and our project chief, couldn't use ROBOT in Apache.

6/10.

5/10.

MS Excel was our first solution.

We paid for an HP consultant who wasn't experienced. They called everyday about everything to the central development team of HP.

It's not so good because some users don't see its real potential because they are afraid they will lose their job.

Keep it simple for an easy beginning, and don't waste time with incompetent people.

• Customization
• Analysis view
• Test Plan
• Defect
• Centralized repository which can sync both onshore and offshore

The company needed an option to integrate all our open source tools like JIRA, Jenkins, LFT, UFT, etc., and Quality Center does this.

It should have the option to integrate open-source and third-party tools. I'd also like more collaboration options. They could make it more lightweight and improve its performance.

I've used it for eight years.

There were some data migration issues when we upgraded to the next version. This was with the user-defined table/column as the extra tables were complex when converting to the newer version.

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered.

It's good, 8/10.

It's good, 8/10.

We have other open source products that do not meet all our requirements

It was complex.

We did it in-house.

It’s good to use for a big organization.

• 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.

9/10

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

• Test Plan
• Test Execution
• Defects tab
• Mapping tests to requirements
• Reporting

The reports we can generate are better.

The performance needs work, as over the past couple years, where I have worked with large companies, I noticed slower response times.

I have used HP ALM and Quality Center and TestDirector for 18 years.

There were some issues.

It is stable in its functionality, but there is some slowness with its performance.

It seems to function with very large companies, but sometimes there seems to be a slower response time, and it could be an internal network issue within the company, but I'm not sure.

I have not had to work with the customer service.

The Test Plan and Test Lab modules.

My clients were able to implement an end-to-end process for software testing. From release management and requirement gathering, to testing and defect management, Quality Center provides a centralized location for managing all aspects of your testing data and results.

The reporting features could be improved.

I've used it for nine years.

There are a lot of nuances with integrations and implementation of Quality Center and third-party applications. With proper planning and expertise guidance, issues with deployment can be resolved. I have not encountered any issues with deployment that could not be resolved.

Stability depends on the hardware/infrastructure where the web application resides. Availability, access, memory, speed are dependent on the environment which is setup, and used, for Quality Center deployment.

No issues encountered.

7/10 for customer service.

Being involved in the HP partner program for many years and involved in a certified support team, I had access to higher levels of support team members which alleviated the hurdles that may be present at the bottom level support team members.

No previous solution used.

It does require a level of expertise to install/setup Quality Center. Doing it without any prior experience, could cause a delay in deployment, as well as unintended issues.

I was a consultant for a Fortune 500 company where we implemented this product not only in our own environment, but for our clients as well. I have implemented this product to over 50 companies since 2006, including top pharmaceutical, and medical device companies within the health and life sciences industry.

Understand what your company needs are, and how many users will need access. There are different licenses based on local, regional, and global access as needed as well as total amount of users. There is also licensing based at a modular level as well. Work with your HP Sales representative to get a pricing/licensing plan for your specific needs.

No other options were evaluated.

Do your research and talk to an expert regarding the product. Having demonstrations and trial access to the product helps with decision making. Understanding the requirements and your current environment helps guide the discussions with an expert. Understanding the limitations will also help.

All features have their own value, but the most valuable ones are--

• Customizations
• SAP Solution Manager integration
• Test set building

Change Management integration - The ability to create change documents on Solution Manager linked to an event and to change its status according to ALM status or to customize it. This is new and I've only used it on one project so far.

Business Process Change Analyzer (BPCA) - It can analyze objects on SAP transport requests to create a Test Set according to scenarios created. Also, because ALM is integrated with blueprints that generate requirements that are converted into a test scenario to validate the changes, it checks if those changes will cause an impact on the selected business process.

Manage Regression Testing and Integrated Test - It's the most important and most popular feature for all the projects I have worked on.

I've been using it for five years, and currently use it alongside HP ALM v11.52.

We had problems with Solution Manager/SAP integration and use through customizing RFC calls.

Not with the tool. Usually problems happens because of a network delay or instability.

An HP expertise team was put together for implementation if needed, but there was no need for them.

10/10

10/10.

I had already used IBM Rational, which is good too, but the HP tool is more complete.

It was done in-house. The team that works here has experience with HP Quality Center and ALM on other projects. The team expertise is high.

Depends on how much you pay for this product and the size of the project. For a big project, it's a great tool that will help a lot.

Use all that his product can offer as there is no need to buy others that can do the same tasks that HP Quality Center does. It's a complete tool that you can customize according to business/IT/user needs.

• 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.

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

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.

• Requirements
• Test Plan/Lab 
• Defects
• The sprinter is a great feature in the manual runner.
• Reporting
• Analysis
• Version Control
• Exporting and Importing
• Document Generator
• Defects Synchronization to other tools like Borland StarTeam and JIRA, for example

Accessibility! The reason I gave it a 9 not 10, is that I doesn’t support Apple machines or any browsers other than IE, and even then, later than IE 10! This is a big problem if the development team who should be working on defects are using Apple machines, which is very common. This is also a big problem for us if higher management wants to take a look on defects for one reason or the other. They are usually on the run and can’t access it using their iPads, for example.

This is a problem that JIRA solved, and it's now practically accessible from any browser on any type of operating system, and can be opened on a cellphone/tablet browser or through mobile applications. It’s perfect when it comes to accessibility and this is what Quality Center desperately needs.

I have been using it for more than six years.

Performance issues are very common. The degradation of performance and consequent failures continuously happen. “Failed to Login” errors are common as well, and some random issues like creating the issue twice and deleting one deletes the other, etc.

No issues encountered.

It's the perfect tool for testing purposes, but you need to consider other options if development teams do not use the environments supported by Quality Center.