We performed a comparison between Jira and OpenText AccuRev 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."We have the best community to support any problems that we have."
"Reports, analytics, and a ton of widgets, they are great and intuitive. Perfect for an agile team."
"The solution is extremely stable."
"In general, the GUI is nice."
"The most valuable feature is the flexibility of the configuration, being able to configure it to suit your own needs."
"Provides good output and is user-friendly."
"There are a couple of things that I find valuable about Jira, the first being its architecture. For instance, I like that you can create dashboards easily, which makes it very user-friendly. You don't need much training on that. You can just get right to it and people are able to use almost all of Jira's features with little training."
"Jira is very useful for project management for internal projects."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is taking snapshots while doing the execution of the test cases."
"The product has all the features that we for application managementat a lower cost."
"The solution is 100% scalable. It's much more scalable than the customer's capacity for implementing it. We do plan to increase usage ourselves."
"The most valuable feature is the Business Process Testing feature, BPT, because it brings in the most revenue."
"A lot of features, such as time tracking, are only available through the marketplace. If multiple users are working on a user story, we aren't able to pull out the reports. So, there are many things that they aren't offering. They are available only through the marketplace. That's not good for a product."
"It is not intuitive."
"I find the dashboard to be Jira's most problematic feature."
"There needs to be an easier way to capture a few metrics. I wish there was an easy way for Jira to explain to me what has been added after the sprint has been done. Currently, it is a bit difficult for me to tell. In addition, when rolling over stories from one sprint to another, it is kind of difficult for me to find out how many story points were actually rolled over without going into Jira and doing an analysis. I wish Jira would somehow aggregate that information for me so I can easily report about it."
"It's also difficult to migrate through, things don't always tie-up. It's not easy to use."
"Jira could be more, for example, like Micro Focus, which is what I mostly work with currently."
"It is not user-friendly."
"Jira required a significant amount of system resources, particularly for larger organizations with extensive workflows and numerous projects."
"The pricing should be more competitive."
"What I'm missing from the solution is a repository for the code. Something like Git, for example. Some sort of depository for the code that is embedded."
"It is difficult to gain experience with the product because resources and documentation for learning are not available."
"In the next release, I would like to have a repository for the code which is embedded. Apart from that, it has everything I need."
Earn 20 points
Jira is ranked 1st in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 266 reviews while OpenText AccuRev is ranked 23rd in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites. Jira is rated 8.2, while OpenText AccuRev is rated 8.6. 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 AccuRev writes "Good packaging features, but reporting is limited". Jira is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, IBM Rational DOORS, OpenText ALM Octane, Rally Software and Polarion ALM, whereas OpenText AccuRev is most compared with Jama Connect. See our Jira vs. OpenText AccuRev 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.