Bugzilla vs. IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Bugzilla
Score 7.7 out of 10
N/A
N/AN/A
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
BugzillaIBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
BugzillaIBM 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
BugzillaIBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Top Pros
Top Cons
Best Alternatives
BugzillaIBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Small Businesses
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.9 out of 10
Polarion ALM
Polarion ALM
Score 9.3 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.9 out of 10
Polarion ALM
Polarion ALM
Score 9.3 out of 10
Enterprises
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.9 out of 10
Polarion ALM
Polarion ALM
Score 9.3 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
BugzillaIBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Likelihood to Recommend
7.7
(18 ratings)
8.8
(22 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
6.0
(10 ratings)
8.0
(6 ratings)
Usability
9.0
(3 ratings)
2.1
(4 ratings)
Availability
9.0
(3 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Performance
8.0
(2 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
5.1
(3 ratings)
5.0
(3 ratings)
In-Person Training
9.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Implementation Rating
8.0
(2 ratings)
10.0
(1 ratings)
Configurability
9.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Ease of integration
9.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Product Scalability
9.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Vendor post-sale
7.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Vendor pre-sale
8.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
BugzillaIBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Likelihood to Recommend
Open Source
Buzilla is easy to use and provides basic functionality to use as a bug tracking tool. If big size attachments are allowed it would have been great. Also with Bugzilla home->Test management area is improved by allowing multiple sections it would be awesome!
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
Open Source
  • Open source! No license fee involved, no limit to the number of licenses.
  • Easy to install and maintain. Installation is very easy and hardly needs any maintenance efforts, except when migrating from one version to other. Each project can have its own group of users.
  • Includes all the core features/fields that are needed to log a software bug/issue.
  • Multiple attachments are possible, supports various formats.
  • Good for reporting. Filtering mechanism lets you query bugs by various parameters.
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
Open Source
  • Cloud Based. I'd like to see bugzilla be cloud based. The company I currently work with made a final decision to change db's for this specific reason. Due to the frequency of travel in this company, they need access to bugzilla from differing national / international locations.
  • Larger File Attachments. I believe the limit of a bugzilla content upload is 4 megabytes. For many of our video'd issues, this file size is simply impractical without the additional effort exertion on video compressor applications.
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
Open Source
For future projects I will look at something that is hosted in the cloud that I don't have to manage. I would also like something that has a more modern feel to allow my customers to use it as well as my employees.
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
Open Source
This is a pretty straightforward system. You put in the bug details, a ticket is created, the team is notified. The user interface reflects this very simple and straightforward flow. It's certainly much easier than trying to track bugs with using Excel and email.
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
Reliability and Availability
Open Source
I used it.
Read full review
IBM
No answers on this topic
Performance
Open Source
I like this rating.
Read full review
IBM
No answers on this topic
Support Rating
Open Source
Since it is open source, it doesn't have customer service. However, the amount of information on forums is vast. If you can wade through it, you'll get what you need
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
In-Person Training
Open Source
I know it.
Read full review
IBM
No answers on this topic
Implementation Rating
Open Source
Implementation was pretty simple. Particularly because the product cannot be customized so there is not much to do apart from getting it up and running.
Read full review
IBM
No problems
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
Open Source
We migrated away from the whole suite of Rational tools because of their massive complexity around administration and inflexibility regarding workflows. In addition, the suite was insanely expensive, and users hated the usability of the tools. We evaluated, and liked JIRA, but because the organization was looking for cost savings, we ended up going with Bugzilla and it's FOSS model so as to avoid ongoing costs.
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
Scalability
Open Source
I used it
Read full review
IBM
No answers on this topic
Return on Investment
Open Source
  • It has made the SDLC process more efficient. Bugs were logged and tracked in emails or in Excel sheets leading to slow communication and at time version issues with multiple files. Being an online tool, Bugzilla solved those issues, improved communication, instant status updates and improved efficiency.
  • We have used Bugzilla with a lot of federal goverment agencies (DHS, CMS, SAMHSA, CDC, HHS etc). Project Directors adn Principle Investigators were at times given access to Bugzilla which provided a snapshot of open vs closed issues.
  • Some groups would resist using Bugzilla with the email reminders being the main reason. Turning off or reminding them of features where we can 'control' email notification helped a lot.
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