We performed a comparison between Jira and OpenText ALM / Quality Center based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."I was able to do real-time reports myself without having to wait for data import."
"This product provides you a good view of the status of your projects."
"It includes by default all the necessary tools for a project manager to work and make their work more efficient."
"The most valuable features of Jira are all the integrations with other systems. It's not the best in any specific area but it has lots of plug-ins and integrations."
"Integration is good."
"The most valuable feature is its flexibility."
"The integration between Confluence and Jira, along with Jira's ticketing system, is a valuable feature the product offers its users."
"The user story map is excellent. The features can be composed into stories and they can be allocated to each of the sprints in a program increment. It allows you to see all that in the user story map, and you have various dashboards to see the stories in various views. You can see them as a backlog view, for example, or you can see as an actual sprint view."
"Having the links maintained within the tool is a huge boon to reporting requirements, tests, and defects."
"The most valuable Quality Center feature, I find, is the solution's integration with some of our automation tools. For us, the ability to capture and record and the ease of use from a user perspective, are all key."
"ALM Quality Center is a reliable, consolidated product."
"Business process management is the most valuable feature of the solution."
"Cross project customization through template really helps to maintain standards with respect to fields, workflows throughout the available projects."
"What they do best is test management. That's their strong point."
"The most valuable user feature that we use right now is the camera."
"The most valuable feature of Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is the alignment of the test to the execution and the linking of the defects to the two. It automatically links any issues you have to the test."
"Jira should allow you to create and develop pipelines easily. In India, we have to purchase them separately or integrate other data tools. All these tools should be in Jira."
"There are no fields to search or to filter by, mainly the ones which use a data around a date and time when something changes."
"The pricing is quite high."
"The part when it comes to the testing area is a bit hard to handle. The screen is too small, you can't really read what you're typing in, and it's only for the testing area. It looks like they have pressed in more than the UI system could handle to display it properly."
"The tool should improve its pricing."
"Jira has recently updated their UI, but more can be done to make it even better."
"It should be connected to ServiceNow."
"The way to configure it can definitely be improved. It is very difficult and complex to configure. Its configuration should be simplified."
"We are looking for more automation capabilities."
"Only Internet Explorer is supported. That is a big problem. They don't support Chrome and Firefox and so on."
"Is not very user-friendly."
"I'd like to see the concept of teams put into it."
"There's room for improvement in the requirements traceability with Micro Focus ALM Quality Center. That could use an uplift."
"Micro Focus ALM Quality Center could improve its marketing. For example, Tricentis is much better at letting the market know about new solutions and updates. The migration of the tool could improve, but it can be difficult."
"There's room for improvement on the reporting side of things and the scheduling, in general, is a bit clunky."
"We have had a poor experience with customer service and support."
More OpenText ALM / Quality Center Pricing and Cost Advice →
Jira is ranked 1st in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 266 reviews while OpenText ALM / Quality Center is ranked 5th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 197 reviews. Jira is rated 8.2, while OpenText ALM / Quality Center is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Jira writes "A great centralized tool that has a good agile framework and is useful for day-to-day planning, task management, and work log efficacy". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText ALM / Quality Center writes "Offers features for higher-end traceability and integration with different tools but lacks in scalability ". Jira is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, IBM Rational DOORS, OpenText ALM Octane, Rally Software and Digital.ai Agility, whereas OpenText ALM / Quality Center is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, OpenText ALM Octane, Tricentis qTest, Zephyr Enterprise and OpenText UFT One. See our Jira vs. OpenText ALM / Quality Center report.
See our list of best Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites vendors.
We monitor all Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
Micro Focus ALM is a complete Test Management tool that can cover Requirements management, Defects management, Test Plan, Test Execution Suites as well as automation test executions with MF UFT (former HP QC). If you have a testing heavy project then MF ALM covers all the testing expectations well.
However, in an integrated environment with development, releases, and testing, JIRA can offer a better experience for JIRA issues (for requirements and incidents/defects), add-on for testing from JIRA marketplace (e.g. X-Ray) and offers a better fitment for DevOps. Developers and testers can work with the same tool for defects. requirements i.e. JIRA and manage testing with JIRA add-ons for Test Management.
I don't know enough about Micro Focus ALM but based from what I have seen it does provide a lot more than JIRA. I have worked with Azure DevOps and know that it can also provide more than JIRA. AZURE DevOps seems to be similar in comparison with Micro Focus ALM. So I would say if it was between JIRA and Micro Focus, then I will choose the latter.