Azure DevOps Server vs. OpenText Silk Central vs. Visual Studio Test Professional

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Azure DevOps Server
Score 8.4 out of 10
N/A
Azure DevOps Server (formerly Team Foundation Server, or TFS) is the on-premise version of Azure DevOps. To license Azure DevOps Server an Azure DevOps license and a Windows operating system license (e.g. Windows Server) for each machine running Azure DevOps Server.N/A
OpenText Silk Central
Score 7.0 out of 10
N/A
Formerly from Micro Focus and earliler from Borland, unified test management with OpenText™ Silk Central drives reuse and efficiency. It gives users the visibility to control application readiness.N/A
Visual Studio Test Professional
Score 7.0 out of 10
N/A
An add-on for the Visual Studio IDE, Visual Studio Test Professional subscription helps teams drive quality and speed. It includes test case management and collaboration features that streamline quality control and support continuous delivery.
$2,169
for the first year (renews at $869)
Pricing
Azure DevOps ServerOpenText Silk CentralVisual Studio Test Professional
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Azure DevOps ServerOpenText Silk CentralVisual Studio Test Professional
Free Trial
NoNoNo
Free/Freemium Version
YesNoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Azure DevOps ServerOpenText Silk CentralVisual Studio Test Professional
Considered Multiple Products
Azure DevOps Server

No answer on this topic

OpenText Silk Central

No answer on this topic

Visual Studio Test Professional
Chose Visual Studio Test Professional
The visual Studio Test tool is faster than other tools. Since the development and testing processes are in one tool, it is more profitable in terms of cost. It is more inconvenient to write a test case in DevOps.
Chose Visual Studio Test Professional
Visual Studio Test Professional stands up because it provides quality integration while fostering development and collaboration between teams.
Chose Visual Studio Test Professional
Our dev team is used to developing with Microsoft tools and managing projects with Azure devops server and service. QA uses the same collaborative platform, so it was easier - almost natural - for all of them to use Visual Studio Test Professional, with full integration and …
Chose Visual Studio Test Professional
Visual Studio Test Professional is head and shoulders above the other options we've tested and used in the past. Our Legacy teams were still using Quality Center as of a month ago and they just switched over to Microsoft Test Professional to join the rest of the organization …
Chose Visual Studio Test Professional
Test Professional is a much more rounded product by nature of its integration with Team Foundation Server. Much lower administrative effort required as only one system needs to be hosted.
Features
Azure DevOps ServerOpenText Silk CentralVisual Studio Test Professional
Test Management
Comparison of Test Management features of Product A and Product B
Azure DevOps Server
-
Ratings
OpenText Silk Central
8.0
1 Ratings
1% below category average
Visual Studio Test Professional
-
Ratings
Centralized test management00 Ratings10.01 Ratings00 Ratings
Manage test hosts and schedules00 Ratings7.01 Ratings00 Ratings
Map tests to user stories00 Ratings9.01 Ratings00 Ratings
Test execution reporting00 Ratings6.01 Ratings00 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Azure DevOps ServerOpenText Silk CentralVisual Studio Test Professional
Small Businesses
GitHub
GitHub
Score 9.1 out of 10
BrowserStack
BrowserStack
Score 8.5 out of 10
BrowserStack
BrowserStack
Score 8.5 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
GitHub
GitHub
Score 9.1 out of 10
OpenText ALM/Quality Center
OpenText ALM/Quality Center
Score 9.1 out of 10
OpenText ALM/Quality Center
OpenText ALM/Quality Center
Score 9.1 out of 10
Enterprises
Perforce P4
Perforce P4
Score 7.2 out of 10
OpenText ALM/Quality Center
OpenText ALM/Quality Center
Score 9.1 out of 10
OpenText ALM/Quality Center
OpenText ALM/Quality Center
Score 9.1 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Azure DevOps ServerOpenText Silk CentralVisual Studio Test Professional
Likelihood to Recommend
9.0
(48 ratings)
7.0
(1 ratings)
7.0
(15 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
10.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Usability
6.0
(4 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
7.0
(10 ratings)
Support Rating
8.4
(10 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
8.5
(10 ratings)
Implementation Rating
8.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Ease of integration
9.0
(2 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Azure DevOps ServerOpenText Silk CentralVisual Studio Test Professional
Likelihood to Recommend
Microsoft
Azure DevOps is good to use if you are all-in on the Microsoft Azure stack. It's fully integrated across Azure so it is a point-and-click for most of what you will need to achieve. If you are new to Azure make sure you get some outside experience to help you otherwise it is very easy to overcomplicate things and go down the wrong track, or for you to manually create things that come out of the box.
Read full review
OpenText
We didn't just select Borland Silk Central randomly. In the selection process, we actually evaluated in total 26 available test management tools in the market. We sent surveys to all potential users in the department to collect their wish list of our next management tool, converted them to a criteria list, and used that list to evaluate all 26 tools. We reduced the possible candidate tools to five and organized a small committee to pick the final three. Top management then checked their price tags and selected Borland Silk Central. Based on this evaluation process, I would say Borland Silk Central is suitable to an organization which has no more than 60 testers; needs both manual tests and automated tests; needs on-line support; needs a low learning curve and has a limited budget. My personal view is that this tool reaches the balance points among ease-of-use, budget and support.
Read full review
Microsoft
It would be well suited if we used it with Azure DevOps as we can effortlessly integrate the test cases and even stories or tasks to stay on track with our work. Those test cases can even be reused across multiple projects. Using any other third-party tools, such as Jira, can be less appropriate, as it's not a Microsoft tool, and its capabilities will be limited.
Read full review
Pros
Microsoft
  • Reporting Integration- Azure boards provides Kanban and other dashboard, their templates for easy management of project.
  • Project Pipeline- easy integration and development of CI/CD pipelines, helped in testing, releasing project artifacts.
  • Version Control- Integration with Git and code IDE made it easy to share, review our code, fix bugs and do testing.
Read full review
OpenText
  • Borland Silk Central is good for the users to associate test requirements, test cases, execution plans and test reports together. Each asset (test case, requirement, etc...) provides links for the users to jump to other assets in a click, and the users can jump back and forth between two assets.
  • Borland Silk Central is also good in test automation. Although Micro Focus does provide a client tool for test automation, the users don't really need it to automate the tests. In our case, we are using Python to automate the tests and use a batch file to launch tests, and in Borland Silk Central we just call that batch file from server side. The test result is automatically fed back to Silk server.
  • Micro Focus also publishes the schema of the database behind Borland Silk Central, so it is very easy to extend its function beyond its original design. Moreover, because its schema is published, we can easily retrieve and process its data for business intelligence purpose.
Read full review
Microsoft
  • Availability of the desktop client or the web interface. The web interface being the favorite and providing a better experience.
  • It enables you to write unit tests with so much ease.
  • Allows the recording and repeating of manual tests
  • It can be set up for collaboration.
Read full review
Cons
Microsoft
  • Can add more build templates for specific technology requirements
  • Can have more features in dashboards which can help dev teams stream line their tasks and priorities
  • Can have raise alarm feature in case of any sort of failure in devops pipeline execution
Read full review
OpenText
  • On the other hand, the plugins of Borland Silk Central with third-party tools are programmed poorly. In our case, the plugins for JIRA have a lot of limitations and were almost unusable in our test environment. (They did improve the plugins a little bit later, however.)
  • The tech support people are located in UK, so frequently it is difficult to get a hold of these guys due to different time zones. Also, most of them obviously don't have enough experience and sometimes drove us nuts in emergency situations.
  • The last thing I feel is that Micro Focus possibly doesn't provide enough manpower to maintain Borland Silk Central. There are tons of feature requests for Borland Silk Central pending there. Although they have frequent hot fixes every few months, they don't digest these requests quick enough.
Read full review
Microsoft
  • The user community of the Visual Studio Test product is weak. For instant problems with this product, it is necessary to quickly reach the source of the error.
  • Licence fees need to be more reasonable. License prices need to be reduced so that they can easily compete with free testing tools.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
Microsoft
Because we are a Microsoft Gold Partner we utilize most of their software and we have so much invested in Team Foundation Server now it would take a catastrophic amount of time and resources to switch to a different product.
Read full review
OpenText
No answers on this topic
Microsoft
No answers on this topic
Usability
Microsoft
For standard users the interface is friendly. but if you are a manager some tools are a little confusing to use, like the query system that you always need to create from scratch. Templates should be more helpful for queries and for standard procedures that you need to duplicate PBIs over time. The search history of Work Items is a little painful to use.
Read full review
OpenText
No answers on this topic
Microsoft
It is very usable if you are familiar with Visual Studio to begin with. If you are new to the interface, it can be a long ramp up period for Testers not used to the GUI. There is always the web option which seems to be more intuitive for many Testers.
Read full review
Support Rating
Microsoft
I have not had to use the support for Azure DevOps Server. There have never been any issues where I was not able to figure it out or quickly resolve. Our Scrum Master has used support before though, and the service has always been prompt and clear with a customer-focus
Read full review
OpenText
No answers on this topic
Microsoft
Visual Studio Test Professional is backed up by the full support of the Microsoft Corporation. That means twenty-four/seven customer support by quality, highly-trained professionals who understand every possible issue that you have experienced before. They are nice, efficient, and highly professional. I recommend them.
Read full review
Implementation Rating
Microsoft
Do research beforehand and, if possible, do a trial run before implementing into production environment.
Read full review
OpenText
No answers on this topic
Microsoft
No answers on this topic
Alternatives Considered
Microsoft
In my opinion, DevOps covers the development process end to end way better than Jira or GitHub. Both competitors are nice in their specific fields but DevOps provides a more comprehensive package in my opinion. It is still crazy to see that the whole suite can be used for free. The productivity increase we realized with DevOps is worth real money!
Read full review
OpenText
We had evaluated, for example:
  • IBM Collaborate Suite - it is way too complicated and the learning curve is too high.
  • HP Quality Center - it is OK but a little bit expensive.
  • TestLink, Squash TM and other open source tools: The capabilities of open source tools just can't compare to commercial tools. Although we can modify the source code to improve the tool, we are just test engineers, not developers.
  • Zephyr: Our testers simply didn't like its UI - too weird.
Read full review
Microsoft
The visual Studio Test tool is faster than other tools. Since the development and testing processes are in one tool, it is more profitable in terms of cost. It is more inconvenient to write a test case in DevOps.
Read full review
Return on Investment
Microsoft
  • It has streamlined the pipeline and project management for our agile effort.
  • It has helped our agile team get organized since that is a new methodology being leveraged within the Enterprise.
  • The calendar has improved visibility into different OOOs across the project team since we all come from different departments across the larger organization.
Read full review
OpenText
  • Borland Silk Central provides a centralized test platform for multiple test departments in the company, so now all of the departments know what each of them is doing. In turn, all departments can coordinate with each other to reduce the duplicated test items and increase the overall test efficiency.
  • Also, Borland Silk Central enables the users to publish the test procedure (steps) of each test case so all the users can know how each test case is performed. It is not like what we had before, the test procedures resided in difference place from Excel to Google drive or some other weird locations.
  • Also, because all departments are using Borland Silk Central, all testers of the departments have better communication regarding testing methods. In the past, the department used different test management tools and it was hard for the testers to understand each other's testing methods.
  • Finally, because all departments share BorlandSilk Central, they also share the same set of reports published to Atlassian Confluence, so now they use the same set of reports to evaluate the test progress.
Read full review
Microsoft
  • One of the positive ROIs of Visual Studios is the fact that it makes producing our work at a quick rate, things like Intellisense make our work get produced at a much higher rate which is good for our return of investment.
  • Testing by the developers has increased by 23%, we now take the time to actually test our product before we send it to our QA people.
  • I am not aware of any negative ROI aspects to our company that have been found.
Read full review
ScreenShots