We performed a comparison between IBM Rational DOORS and Jama Connect based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Requirements Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."I like the user interface with regard to creating links between requirements and tracing links to requirements."
"It is a stable solution."
"Very customizable and can be as powerful as you want it to be."
"It is very customizable and easy to scale."
"I really like the customization that can be done using the DOORS Extension Language (DXL)."
"It's a very interesting tool. I like that it's simple. You have to create your document, add your templates, and have your headings and definitions, and it's done. You must attribute the discipline and fill out the comment field for requirements. It also provides you with unique IDs for each requirement. I like that it never duplicates IDs."
"This product can help improve how your organization proceeds through solution development."
"Traceability on requirements for a huge project in an organization is a big gain."
"The most valuable feature is the user-friendly interface."
"Jama Connect is a good tool for the entire software development cycle."
"Technical support answers fairly quickly compared to others like IBM or Atlassian. They also offer quite a good knowledge base for advanced cases and how to plan it, etc. via videos that they provide. They are quite useful."
"Provides suitable tools for managing regulatory requirements."
"I like Jama Connect because it's easy to use and understand. The widgets are great, and linking is straightforward. The solution is not complex compared to its competitors."
"You can get full traceability with any other system. It also includes a test module, and you build the traceability matrix incrementally throughout the development process."
"It is good at requirements management and test management."
"It would be helpful if Microsoft provided a more user-friendly interface for updating and querying updates. Additionally, if there was a way for users to notify developers of any changes in requirements, it would allow for faster and more efficient updates to the solution's architecture. This could be in the form of a notification system that alerts developers of any changes that need to be made. Additionally, the solution is document-driven and it should be more digital."
"The software and GUI is very outdated."
"There are problems with communicating between DOORS and Microsoft Office."
"Not all Rational Team Concert operations are available from the web client. Certain operations, like creating streams or components, still require using the desktop application. They're not accessible through the web interface. And in my opinion, this limitation should be removed."
"The interface is not very user-friendly and has not evolved in a long time."
"One thing that I would like to see is a lower-cost version of it that we could use for smaller projects. Sometimes, we do projects for commercial customers who would benefit from something like DOORS, but it's just so expensive. It's just a monster, so a lower-cost version would be the thing that we'd like to see."
"The performance could be improved. It doesn't run as smoothly as it could."
"Both the performance and the price could be improved."
"There are some security concerns with Jama Connect, including two-factor enablement."
"The initial setup could be better, it's complicated."
"The user interface could be modernized and the product lacks project management functionalities."
"I think there's room for improvement, especially with the review process. Reviews should be integrated with requirement evaluation instead of being separate from it. The review should not run parallel to the requirement."
"I believe one of the weak points is the reporting side. You must export inter-readable reports from Jama if you do not use the system as a repository for your design history file. Jama is great if you keep it in Jama, but reporting out requires some customization to get it right."
"I have inquired about pricing for this solution but have not yet heard anything, so their response time in this regard is something that should be improved."
"Test management can be improved. It's not so scalable. The user interface needs to split things into small projects."
"t is rather slow, so the speed of the process and consuming information should be improved. It doesn't have a nice way of viewing information. We would like to see better interfaces for consuming information."
IBM Rational DOORS is ranked 1st in Application Requirements Management with 51 reviews while Jama Connect is ranked 5th in Application Requirements Management with 9 reviews. IBM Rational DOORS is rated 8.0, while Jama Connect is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of IBM Rational DOORS writes " Offers ability to automate tasks and to track changes within documents and compare different versions of requirements but modeling capabilities could benefit from a web-based tool ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Jama Connect writes "Agile, well structured, and has a great review module, which makes the design reviews smooth". IBM Rational DOORS is most compared with Polarion Requirements, Jira, Helix ALM, IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation and PTC Integrity Requirements Connector, whereas Jama Connect is most compared with Polarion Requirements, Jira, IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation, Microsoft Azure DevOps and Polarion ALM. See our IBM Rational DOORS vs. Jama Connect report.
See our list of best Application Requirements Management vendors.
We monitor all Application Requirements Management 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.