Azure DevOps vs. IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Azure DevOps
Score 7.9 out of 10
N/A
Azure DevOps (formerly VSTS, Microsoft Visual Studio Team System) is an agile development product that is an extension of the Microsoft Visual Studio architecture. Azure DevOps includes software development, collaboration, and reporting capabilities.
$2
per GB (first 2GB free)
IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Score 5.1 out of 10
N/A
IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) is an end-to-end engineering solution used to manage system requirements to design, workflow, and test management, extending the functionality of ALM tools for better complex-systems development.N/A
Pricing
Azure DevOpsIBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Editions & Modules
Azure Artifacts
$2
per GB (first 2GB free)
Basic Plan
$6
per user per month (first 5 users free)
Azure Pipelines - Self-Hosted
$15
per extra parallel job (1 free parallel job with unlimited minutes)
Azure Pipelines - Microsoft Hosted
$40
per parallel job (1,800 minutes free with 1 free parallel job)
Basic + Test Plan
$52
per user per month
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Azure DevOpsIBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Azure DevOpsIBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Considered Both Products
Azure DevOps
Chose Azure DevOps
This is the first platform our dev team shared to us so I can't really compare but overall its such a great tool to have even if you are not from tech or dev team.
Chose Azure DevOps
We would use App Center for distributing our app to testers, and we could implement the same functionality as was handled by App Center, and as far as I remember we even had some automatic conversion of our jobs from App Center. After the conversion, we could see that Azure …
Chose Azure DevOps
We love the multi-tier hierarchy in Azure DevOps for tasks, with epics, features, stories, bugs and tasks all available in a nice nested hierarchy. It's not as pretty as Monday.com and doesn't work as well OOTB as ServiceNow SPM however.
Chose Azure DevOps
It is a similar tools with its pros and cons but does not really a differential - I would say it does the same but its own way, sometimes better, other times worst. It is a matter of preference or demands that come from superior decisions, so you just have to take it.
Chose Azure DevOps
Jira is fantastic for project management and customer facing portal. It is not good for pure development (no integration with Git, pipeline management, automated testing features). If DevOps were to integrate and adopt the project features of Jira as well as the customer facing …
Chose Azure DevOps
Azure DevOps provides integrated environment vs Jira is dependent on third party for couple of features
Chose Azure DevOps
The moment I have been working with this tool everything has benn operating efficiently. The software development process has borne positive results under scalable environment. The cost of running Azure DevOps Services us much lower as compared to other tools in the market. It …
Chose Azure DevOps
ADO has better linking than Confluence and is adaptable for a specific need, whereas Confluence might be a bit more rigid, but it's also sort of along the same lines as to what can be done with both tools. ADO also had an ease of use to it and can do a bunch of stuff with it, …
Chose Azure DevOps
Jira is super clunky and doesn't behave in a modern fashion. monday.com is too flexible and doesn't provide enough feature set. AWS is the most competitive, but it's hard to wrap your brain around all of the features and offerings provided by amazon. ADO does a better job of …
Chose Azure DevOps
Azure DevOps has a drag and drop editor so that you can quickly drag build steps into a build or release pipeline. This is much faster than looking up the correct yaml syntax. Additionally, its support for Microsoft and Azure is great. If you're on the .net stack or you use …
Chose Azure DevOps
Azure DevOps has more services and better integration with other tools. When it. Comes to the overall software development process management ecosystem.
Chose Azure DevOps
As a cloud services user of Azure, using Azure DevOps made sense because it has the most support tailored for Azure ecosystem.
Chose Azure DevOps
Microsoft Planner is used by project managers and IT service managers across our organization for task tracking and running their team meetings. Azure DevOps works better than Planner for software development teams but might possibly be too complex for non-software teams or …
Chose Azure DevOps
Graphically it overtakes the grade of traceability of artifacts delivered to environments More user-friendly to orchestrate the deliveries.
Chose Azure DevOps
Trello is simple to use, but it's only for a Kanban board. Jira might be the same, but I don't really have enough experience with Jira to fully compare them. When I used it, it missed certain functionalities that I was used to in Azure DevOps. Visually it's a lot different too.
Chose Azure DevOps
Azure DevOps Services have huge functionality and are well supported by Microsoft as well. You will get plenty of features in the marketplace and learning documentation.
Chose Azure DevOps
Writing the Docker Images, Storing them in Azure Container Registry and then Deploying onto Azure Kubernetes Services is an Easier process which no other software/product is currently providing in the market. Best till date in terms of End to End deployment and maintaining …
Chose Azure DevOps
Azure DevOps is widely used because of its collaboration and integration with various other tools. Here the assign of the sub task is quite easy compare to Jira. Also Azure Devops can we integrate easily with Git for better code representation and versioning. It reporting is …
Chose Azure DevOps
Azure DevOps is a completed product and ecosystem. It offers a robust ecosystem that does everything that is needed. The above products do lack features like pipelines tasks, third-party integrations. Besides all cloud benefits, the main advantage of Azure DevOps Services …
Chose Azure DevOps
Currently, we use both products, however, we use more the Atlassian suite. We have started recently using Azure DevOps for specific implementations and projects. We don't have any plan yet to migrate all our projects to Azure DevOps, we may in the next couple of years. …
Chose Azure DevOps
We tested alternatives for Azure DevOps over time. We tested GitHub a while ago and back then lack of some features that now hast, like the project boards and private repositories. We will check GitHub next year.

We also tested AWS CodeCommit and found it very cryptic, …
Chose Azure DevOps
Beside all cloud benefits, the main advantage Azure DevOps Services compared to Azure DevOps Server is the easier remote access for third party team members, and always up to date software.
On the other hand, on prem deployment (Azure DevOps Server) makes complex access or …
Chose Azure DevOps
The greatest strength of Azure DevOps Services (formerly VSTS) is that it's a one-stop solution for all agile project management instead of setting up bits of different software put together for each and every need. Azure DevOps Services (formerly VSTS) has a great ecosystem …
Chose Azure DevOps
I prefer Azure Devops over all other code repository / ci/cd systems that I've used in the past. All features are integrated into a single service (back log, repo mgmt, deployment pipelines, artifacts, etc.). The tools are easy to use and super powerful.
Chose Azure DevOps
Our company is already using a lot of Azure services and it makes more sense to start using Azure DevOps Services (formerly VSTS) when we needed a CI/CD tool. We tested different features of Azure DevOps Services (formerly VSTS) and found out that the build and release …
IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Unfortunately, this IBM ELM installation predates my tenure, and the project and client have become entrenched in it with no viable way to move off of it. There are better products capable of doing individual workflows well. ELM's attraction is that it does a lot of things OK.
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
The established experience contained in most IBM Rational DOORS installations is only compensated by the high flexibility of Atlassian Jira. The markets state that Jira is less expensive in the setup. There are many manufacturers that support IBM Rational DOORS to have the big …
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
I would choose IBM Rational DOORS over any other requirements management tool out there. Polarion tries to do too many things and is great for some things but as far as requirements management IBM Rational DOORS is the best tool on the market.
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
It was easier to do all the change management-related activities, even configurations were handled very effectively. New process definitions and initiatives made it easier for better project deliverables. Effective resource allocations and better reporting and defect …
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
DOORS is not a suite nor an integrated tool like HP ALM or Rally. It only does one thing and cannot hold defects or accommodate sprint planning. It is older, takes longer to connect and load, and has an inconvenient timeout. It does do a basic job and can be customized to show …
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
DOORS is the legacy and leading tool for requirements management. It is widely used by the Aerospace industry.
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Although Jira is getting popular in DevOps team, it does not work well with ITIL model as RTC does. RTC is still widely used for production management in our company.

CA Service Desk Manager (GSD) is integrated with TPAM which is being used for privilege account management in …
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
To me, DOORS is like a super version of Excel and Word combined with a relational database. I have not used too many database softwares before, but DOORS does a very specific job well enough. It is so powerful that some of the tools just go unused. Some parts of the software …
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Requisite Pro (and Rational Requirements Composer, it's successor) is more simple and focused on requirements. Is like a part of DOORS and can be suitable to smaller projects. IT people on the other hand prefer agile tools like Jira. Of course if the project is big enough, …
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
My organization was already using it when I joined the team.
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
It's well integrated with IBM products so it provides better coverage across the lifecycle with first class integration. Other producst are stand alone with limited integration with ALM tools.
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
I found [them] to be more flexible and with the possibility to create [an HTML format].
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
An alternative which I have very briefly used is Atlassian's JIRA, which is very similar to IBM RTC, although has a modern UI, feels light-weight and is faster to respond and additionally has seamless integration with bitbucket, which is a Git platform, and other Atlassian …
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
JIRA is simpler and much more intuitive, especially when bundled with confluence. TFS is obvious choice if working with Microsoft technologies and has superb API.
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
I have worked on different agile project management tool like JIRA, Teamfoge and RTC. RTC is simple and has a nice UI.
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
It is easy for the organization to identify what kind of problems there are in the project and how many change requests have been resolved and how many are pending. Thereby the employer can pro-actively arrange the meetings and address the issues to the team members.
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
This product had many of the same features, was easier to use, which would result in less training, and had a lower price tag. Logic and reason do not always figure prominently in a decision. Sometimes there are intangible characteristics that alter the flow. In my observation, …
Best Alternatives
Azure DevOpsIBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Small Businesses
GitHub
GitHub
Score 9.2 out of 10
Polarion ALM
Polarion ALM
Score 9.9 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
GitHub
GitHub
Score 9.2 out of 10
Polarion ALM
Polarion ALM
Score 9.9 out of 10
Enterprises
Perforce P4
Perforce P4
Score 7.5 out of 10
Polarion ALM
Polarion ALM
Score 9.9 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Azure DevOpsIBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Likelihood to Recommend
8.8
(0 ratings)
3.0
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
10.0
(0 ratings)
8.0
(0 ratings)
Usability
8.4
(0 ratings)
4.0
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
8.1
(0 ratings)
5.0
(0 ratings)
Implementation Rating
10.0
(0 ratings)
10.0
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Azure DevOpsIBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Likelihood to Recommend
DevOps is much more user friendly than Git itself. There is a more GUI-centric interface, tighter integration with the Azure / Entra architecture. For those of use in the Microsoft-sphere, it really is excellent for code-centric project management. I rate this as an 8 because it does not seem quite as well suited for fully functional / non-code project aspects in implementation. Nor does it have customer / end-user portal / front end for easy reporting and insight.
Read full review
IBM Engineering Requirements Management DOORS former IBM Rational DOORS profits very much from the mighty market position it had till today. It had been the most favored requirement engineering tools suite with the highest investments in the infrastructure concerning hardware, software, and knowledge sources. It was embedded in knowledge sources of test stands, hardware labs, and knowledge database servers. It allowed for some of the highest profit changes and made the fame with it. But the paradigms of requirements engineering change. If not were superseded by completely different approaches for the target solution worlds. The foremost position in the selling tables is unstable if changes are not solved or coped with by the strategist at IBM and their customers. Since the highly successful alternative suits are already at the market, and some are from IBM already the lifecycle for IBM Engineering Requirements Management DOORS is at the later highs. But the suite is still at the very top and very popular. There are still many problems unsolved and many wishes at the customers to make the use more comfortable and efficient at the overall level. If the time of setting up the software package is passed the adoption get more extended and complicated. There is a lot of work at the stage around and the expertise will be required for a long time from now.
Read full review
Pros
  • Flexible Requirements Hierarchy Management: AZDO makes it easy to track items such as features or epics as a flat list, or as a hierarchy in which you can track the parent-child relationship.
  • Fast Data Entry: AZDO was designed to facilitate quick data entry to capture work items quickly, while still enabling detailed capture of acceptance criteria and item properties.
  • Excel Integration: AZDO stands out for its integration with MS Excel, which enables quick updates for bulk items.
Read full review
  • There are a couple of areas where IBM Rational DOORS is quite strong. First, it is part of the IBM CLM solution so the artifacts developed in this module can be easily available for other functions like development and QA. They can link with their stories and test cases and team leads and managers can use traceability matrix to find out where there are gaps in coverage.
  • Comprehensive configuration management functionality (concept of multiple streams and global configuration) is available, which can be helpful if you need to implement configuration management scenarios for your product or project. For example, a certain version of a requirement can be linked with one story and another version of same requirement can be linked with another story. This is the unique feature which other current tools in the market don't provide.
  • It's highly customizable so you can configure the project areas based on your need. You can have your own requirement types, and you can define templates to speed up the process. Comprehensive review functionality is there as well.
Read full review
Cons
  • I did mention it has good visibility in terms of linking, but sometimes items do get lost, so if there was a better way to manage that, that would be great.
  • The wiki is not the prettiest thing to look at, so it could have refinements there.
  • It could improve the search slightly better.
Read full review
  • Too complex for projects or businesses that don't really need the detail. It is basically overkill.
  • If you are new to IBM Rational tools, it may be a medium learning curve. You'd also need lots of training from your people, since, as usual, this tool shouldn't be managed alone.
  • It may seem old fashion compared to Jira and the current control tools used in IT industry.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
I don't think our organization will stray from using VSTS/TFS as we are now looking to upgrade to the 2012 version. Since our business is software development and we want to meet the requirements of CMMI to deliver consistent and high quality software, this SDLC management tool is here to stay. In addition, our company uses a lot of Microsoft products, such as Office 365, Asp.net, etc, and since VSTS/TFS has proved itself invaluable to our own processes and is within the Microsoft family of products, we will continue to use VSTS/TFS for a long, long time.
Read full review
One of the downsides for us was the capabilities of the native build tools were lacking. The project management and work item tracking capabilities are great and I would recommend the tool to anyone. There is a definite learning curve with RTC as a source control system, and the streams are a concept unique to the product
Read full review
Usability
It's a great help to get more information about new feature release and stay updated on what the dev team is working on. I like how easy it is to just login and read through the work items. Each work item has basic details: Title, Description, Assigned to, State, Area (what it belongs to), and iteration (when it’s worked on). See image above.They move through different states (New → Discovery → Ready for Prod → etc.).
Read full review
The UI is terrible and not intuitive. Users need training in order to complete tasks. Much like SAP, it's not the clearest tool. The tracing feature is especially complicated because you must write the scripts yourself. There is a learning curve. Also, even the setup, installation, and logging in each time takes a considerable amount of time.
Read full review
Support Rating
When we've had issues, both Microsoft support and the user community have been very responsive. DevOps has an active developer community and frankly, you can find most of your questions already asked and answered there. Microsoft also does a better job than most software vendors I've worked with creating detailed and frequently updated documentation.
Read full review
It does a basic job and has the potential to complete some robust reporting tasks, however, it really is a clunky piece of software with a terrible user interface that makes using it routinely quite unpleasant. Many of our legacy and maintenance projects still use DOORS but our department and company use many alternatives and are looking for better tools.
Read full review
Implementation Rating
Was not part of the process.
Read full review
No problems
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
We love the multi-tier hierarchy in Azure DevOps for tasks, with epics, features, stories, bugs and tasks all available in a nice nested hierarchy. It's not as pretty as monday.com and doesn't work as well OOTB as ServiceNow SPM however.
Read full review
Unfortunately, this IBM ELM installation predates my tenure, and the project and client have become entrenched in it with no viable way to move off of it. There are better products capable of doing individual workflows well. ELM's attraction is that it does a lot of things OK.
Read full review
Return on Investment
  • Increased dev team efficiency through more streamlined development processes and task automation.
  • Improved quality of software deployments due to better source control, automated testing, and release management options available in DevOps.
  • Better collaboration between the dev team, business analysts, and agile project managers.
Read full review
  • RTC helps automate incident management workflow which improves our work efficiency. With the integration with Geneos and GSD, we can one click create RTC incident tickets from Geneos with most of the information copied from Geneos automatically and then link the details to GSD for privilege account management if needed.
  • RTC provides a holistic view on ad hoc production activities. We use RTC for production management. Whoever needs to get access to production due to non-planned activities (planned change is managed in GSD) has to raise an incident ticket or service request ticket in RTC so as to get production privilege accounts.
  • RTC is also being used to review and approve the usage of privilege account which help us to meet audit requirements. For example, if a user made some database change using privilege account under incident number xxx, an entry will be added in RTC and sent to account owner or production support manager to review and approve.
Read full review
ScreenShots