Azure DevOps Services vs. IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Azure DevOps Services
Score 8.6 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 7.0 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 DevOps ServicesIBM 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 DevOps ServicesIBM 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 DevOps ServicesIBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Considered Both Products
Azure DevOps Services

No answer on this topic

IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
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.
Top Pros
Top Cons
Best Alternatives
Azure DevOps ServicesIBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Small Businesses
Docker
Docker
Score 9.2 out of 10
Polarion ALM
Polarion ALM
Score 9.3 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
Docker
Docker
Score 9.2 out of 10
Polarion ALM
Polarion ALM
Score 9.3 out of 10
Enterprises
Docker
Docker
Score 9.2 out of 10
Polarion ALM
Polarion ALM
Score 9.3 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Azure DevOps ServicesIBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Likelihood to Recommend
8.8
(66 ratings)
8.8
(22 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
10.0
(3 ratings)
8.0
(6 ratings)
Usability
7.0
(5 ratings)
2.1
(4 ratings)
Support Rating
8.1
(11 ratings)
5.0
(3 ratings)
Implementation Rating
10.0
(1 ratings)
10.0
(1 ratings)
User Testimonials
Azure DevOps ServicesIBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Likelihood to Recommend
Microsoft
ADO is well suited for the visibility of day-to-day tasks and responsibilities as well as things such as Features, user stories, etc. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any scenario where it might not be well suited, as you can customize ADO to your liking to a degree.
Read full review
IBM
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
Microsoft
  • 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
IBM
  • Easy to use with well defined template and user defined fields. New team can setup a project area easily by copying an existing template and adding customized fields for their special needs.
  • It can be used during almost the whole project cycle and give us a better view and control on the projects.
  • Lots of built-in report functions.
Read full review
Cons
Microsoft
  • Column sorting when in filtered states.
  • A way to show cross-team dependencies.
  • A customized "From" field for notifications. Sometimes when a mail comes from Azure DevOps the teams do not realize that I am sending it
  • A way to do online poker that doesn't require a plug-in.
Read full review
IBM
  • Wireframes are quite basic. If you need intuitive and interactive wireframes to elaborate the requirements. you probably need to define outside the tool and then upload as image.
  • ER (define data dictionaries) modeling is not there.
  • Use case modeling is quite basic. You can visualize the use case and actors relation but the tool does not enforce the rules.
  • Does not support offline work.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
Microsoft
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
IBM
At the moment we are required by contract to continue to use the IBM DOORS software for our current client. Given that it can be expensive, if we were to use it after our current client's needs were met, we would have to secure other projects in order to justify the continued use of the software.
Read full review
Usability
Microsoft
Azure DevOps is a powerful, complex cloud application. As such there are a number of things it does great and something where there is room for improvement. One of those areas would be in usability. In my opinion it relies too much on search. There is no easy way to view all projects or to group them in a logical way. You need to search for everything.
Read full review
IBM
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
Microsoft
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
IBM
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
Microsoft
Was not part of the process.
Read full review
IBM
No problems
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
Microsoft
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 more business-focused projects. We also use ServiceNow for IT service management and this tool provides better analysis and tracking of IT incidents, as Azure DevOps is more suited to development and project work for dev teams.
Read full review
IBM
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 management. The overall cost of the tool is great too and well within budget.
Read full review
Return on Investment
Microsoft
  • It provides a great IDE to make things easier, clear, and compact. It has always been a positive ROI
  • It's worth the money. I don't think any other software could replace the VS. It has helped us a lot to making things ready on time
  • The only thing I dislike is that it takes a lot of memory space when in an idle state
Read full review
IBM
  • If you can setup DOORS to your project, you will experience lower costs.
  • Also, less rework in the project, which means lower times to achieve your milestones.
  • Finally, the cost of setting up a related project is considerably lower, and the estimates obtained in the process are much more precise.
Read full review
ScreenShots