We performed a comparison between IBM Rational DOORS and IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation 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."The traceability matrix in DOORS improved our project outcomes. It helps ensure coverage of requirements at different levels, from user requirements to software requirements to test requirements."
"Makes good work of prioritizing and planning product delivery."
"Compared to other tools that I have used over the past 20 years, DOORS is the best of the best."
"What I like about DOORS is baselines, it's easy and I use the capability of multiple users. The traceability or links between different levels are very nice. Additionally, it is used by all of our suppliers, which brings us commonality."
"IBM Rational DOORS keeps everything organized."
"The shell scripting is the solution's most valuable aspect."
"It is very customizable and easy to scale."
"It is a mature product that is stable."
"The most valuable features are the baselines and links."
"IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation is easier to expand to build a backend with several servers, so you can also use it to scale up to several hundreds of users without major problems."
"As far as maintaining our requirements so that we can have copies of them, it's good. I can print it out if necessary."
"The most valuable features are the versioning of requirements and the possibility to reuse them."
"My company contacts the solution's technical support, and they are good and responsive."
"There are many good features with DOORS. The solution has a concept of streams and baselines, as well as a concept of components. A component is a subproject inside a project."
"The tool's most valuable feature is displaying requirements in a tabular format. This means you can see everything laid out in columns and rows. It is more aesthetic compared to other tools. The traceability matrix helps to view things better. It comes with different linking rules."
"The "Link by Attribute" feature is useful for making links without needing to use the web interface manually."
"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 problem is that because the GUI is so bad, you either have to spend a lot of money customizing the interface yourself, or a lot of money on training."
"I would like to see them improve in agile management the Scrum/Kanban Board to work with overseas team members."
"The web application DOORS Web Access doesn't have the same functionality as the standard client, so it's not a real substitute. For example, web Access only provides writing requirements, but you can't do much more with it."
"It would be nice if it could be scaled-down so that it could be installed and implemented without much learning or training."
"IBM should integrate some solutions they already own toenhance the utility of the product further. Specifically import and export to Office products is more difficult than it needs to be."
"Overall, the user experience should be enhanced."
"The interface is not very user-friendly and has not evolved in a long time."
"Both the data storage and reporting for this solution need improvement."
"It offers a bad user experience and the usability is poor."
"The only additional feature would be if it had dynamic linking to other MBSE tool sets or industry-leading tools."
"Be very careful how you load your DNG server. There are limits to the number of artifacts a server can handle."
"When you are in Jira or Confluence, you have some freedom in how you type in text. That's also a weakness of Confluence, however, as it opens the doors to sloppy work. In DOS Next Generation, the text is very rigorous, but it might be difficult for people who don't have the discipline. Having a way to quickly enter requirements could help. It might already be in there, but I don't know. I don't have enough experience with the tool yet."
"I have come to the conclusion that if you are considering migrating from DOORS to DNG, don't! Instead of spending 100's to 1000's of hours doing migrations, invest those hours in a DXL programmer to make DOORS do what it isn't doing for you now."
"It does have a tendency to condense the requirements. It kind of puts them in a tree format. Sometimes those trees are a little difficult."
"There is room for improvement in the APIs that they have exposed for integration."
More IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM Rational DOORS is ranked 1st in Application Requirements Management with 51 reviews while IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation is ranked 4th in Application Requirements Management with 12 reviews. IBM Rational DOORS is rated 8.0, while IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation is rated 7.8. 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 IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation writes "An industry-leading tool to demonstrate traceability between requirements, with valuable features for tailoring modules and managing several thousand requirements". IBM Rational DOORS is most compared with Polarion Requirements, Jira, Jama Connect, Helix ALM and PTC Integrity Requirements Connector, whereas IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation is most compared with Jama Connect, Jira, Polarion Requirements, Helix ALM and PTC Integrity Requirements Connector. See our IBM Rational DOORS vs. IBM Rational DOORS Next Generation 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.