We performed a comparison between Micro Focus ALM Quality Center and Microsoft Azure Devops based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Azure DevOps is the winner in this comparison. According to reviews, Azure Devops is a powerful solution that is easier to set up, and less expensive than Quality Center.
"I like the fact that there is built-in Power BI. Both are Microsoft tools. So, you can incorporate dashboard capabilities."
"There are great automation tools."
"You get a complete solution with Azure DevOps. You can do everything in one place, starting from requirement gathering until you release the product. It is a reliable, scalable, and handy product."
"It is good for monitoring purposes. We are using the build pipelines of Microsoft Azure. They are also valuable."
"We are able to generate many different types of reports from Azure."
"Some of the valuable features are the functionality and the wide range of capabilities."
"The automated bill feature is most valuable. As with most software developers, I can build code on my machine, but if one of my coworkers can't build the same code on theirs, there are always issues in trying to track it down. The automated bill process makes it a lot easier to track down where the issues are and find out what bugs aren't being included for whatever reason."
"Microsoft Azure DevOps integrates well with other components, such as Synapse, which is a data warehouse tool of Azure. It is a framework platform for BI and integrated with other tools, such as Power BI."
"The best thing is that you can see your current status in real time... To see real-time updates, you just log in to ALM and you can see exactly what the progress is. You can also see if the plan for the day is being executed properly, and it's all tracked. From the management side, I find those features very valuable."
"It is a tool, and it works. It has got good linkage and good traceability between the test cases and the defects. It has got lots of features for testing."
"It is stable and reliable."
"ALM Quality Center's best features are the test lab, requirement tab, and report dashboard."
"I like that it integrates with the Jira solutions."
"The solution is very user-friendly."
"You can do your development from start to finish: starting with the requirements, ending with defects, and testing in-between."
"From reporting to team management, everything is better now."
"Some things like project management, tasks, progress, and having work progress views require us to use some external tools, or to create our own internal tools. These are not native to DevOps. It would be ideal if, instead of searching for third-party solutions, they had these feature sets or capabilities included under DevOps."
"The solution is generally stable but not entirely issue-free."
"There is room for improvement on the UI side, especially with merge requests. If we compare Azure DevOps to GitLab when it comes to branches and PRs (pull requests), GitLab has a better interface."
"They should expand it from just a PC, software, or server development platform to other kinds of software or engineering systems so that it is not necessarily built around a normal PC with a server. I would like to see the ability to write my own scripts in my own compiled program or online. Right now, there are things that you can do in the user interface, but you can't do them programmatically and vice versa. I want to see them both. If I can do it in a script, I should be able to do it from the user interface, and if I can do it in the user interface, I should be able to do it in a script."
"Better integration with the Linux operating system would be an improvement for this solution."
"When comparing with Jira, I find that the task management capabilities in Azure DevOps are not yet fully comprehensive and should be enhanced."
"We would like some bidirectional synchronization. It's the requirement if you want to analyze it to software requirements, et cetera. That's something that most of the tools aren't that good at."
"While reporting in Azure DevOps is a robust capability, there's always room for enhancement, particularly in providing more granular reports."
"Certain applications within this solution are not really compatible with certain applications like ERP. The problem is when we're trying to use these applications or devices, the solution itself doesn't scale."
"ALM requires that you install client side components. If your organization does not allow admin rights on your local machine, this means you will need someone to run the installation for you with admin rights. This client side install is also limited to Internet Explorer and does not support any other browsers."
"The solution needs to offer support for Agile. Currently, ALM only supports Waterfall."
"ALM Quality Center could be improved with more techniques to manage Agile processes."
"Browser support needs improvement. Currently, it can only run on IE, Internet Explorer. It doesn't work on Firefox, doesn't work on Chrome, doesn't work on a Mac book. Those are the new technologies where most companies move towards. That's been outstanding for quite a while before it even became Micro Focus tools when it was still HP. Even before HP, that's always been an issue."
"Sometimes I do run my queries from the admin login. However, if I want to reassess all my test cases, then I am still doing this in a manual manner. I write SQL queries, then fire them off. Therefore, a library of those SQL queries would help. If we could have a typical SQL query to change the parameters within test cases, then this is one aspect I can still think that could be included in ALM. Though they would need to be analyzed and used in a very knowledgeable way."
"The BPT also known as Business Process Testing can sometimes be very time intensive and sometimes might not be very intuitive to someone who is not familiar with BPT."
"It is not a scalable solution."
More OpenText ALM / Quality Center Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Azure DevOps is ranked 2nd in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 127 reviews while OpenText ALM / Quality Center is ranked 6th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 197 reviews. Microsoft Azure DevOps is rated 8.2, while OpenText ALM / Quality Center is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Microsoft Azure DevOps writes "Allows us to deploy code to production without releasing certain features immediately and agile project management capabilities offer resource-leveling". 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 ". Microsoft Azure DevOps is most compared with GitLab, Jira, TFS, Rally Software and Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, whereas OpenText ALM / Quality Center is most compared with OpenText ALM Octane, Jira, Tricentis qTest, Zephyr Enterprise and OpenText UFT One. See our Microsoft Azure DevOps 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.
