Likelihood to Recommend I personally would prefer other products on the market right now such as Microsoft
Team Foundation Server and Test Manager. I think having a product like Caliber that can only do requirements without integrating with a another system makes things a little more time consuming.
Read full review Polarion ALM shines where it is intended to be used: Application Lifecycle Management. It fits well with agile development concepts, but the extensive customization abilities allow it to adapt to other concepts, too. It is suitable as an all-in-one solution, which is capable of giving transparency over all related areas, be it Requirement Management, Test Management, Release Management, Defect Management, etc., to the involved stakeholders.
Read full review Pros Borland Caliber tracks functional and non-functional requirements pretty easily. You can easily add a requirement and attach a spreadsheet or a picture if needed. Moving the hierarchy of requirements is fairly easy by just dragging and dropping. Assigning users to approve requirements is simple by the fields included when adding a requirement and then submitting for review. Read full review Requirements Management: Polarion ALM provides a centralized repository for capturing and managing requirements. Teams can define, organize, and link requirements to other artifacts like test cases and development tasks. Test Management: Polarion ALM facilitates end-to-end test management. Teams can create detailed test cases, manage test execution, and track test results. Traceability and Impact Analysis: Polarion ALM ensures traceability across all phases of the development lifecycle. Users can establish links between requirements, test cases, development tasks, and other artifacts. This traceability helps in impact analysis, allowing teams to understand how changes in one area may affect other parts of the project. Customization and Adaptability: Polarion ALM is highly customizable to fit the unique needs of different organizations and industries. Users can create custom workflows, define custom fields, and adapt the tool to their specific development processes. Read full review Cons I think Borland Caliber visually needs to be updated. It looks very out of date compared to other products on the market. The text box has a notepad feel to it and it's hard to make it visually catching. Borland Caliber needs to be easier to integrate with other testing and development products on the market. Having fields more related to URS and FRS would be helpful to auto-link to a document. So enter in a URS or FRS document ID at the beginning of a project in Caliber and then auto-assigning requirement IDs to link to pieces of code or test cases and having the user be able to decide a naming convention. Borland Caliber needs a specific table for linking to a document ID and then each requirement could auto-generate a sub ID for each requirement to make the process of filling in User Requirements and Functional Requirements more efficient. Then the user should be able to modify the sub ID if the naming convention needed to be different. Read full review More robust engine as far as the actual took is concerned. There are navigation components in trace to reporting which we feel can be improved especially when dealing with cross global accessing of the tool. It slows us down a bit so it's backend driven optimization as well as some front end "clunkiness" that can be improved. Improve some filtering capabilities especially in creating custom reports and generally all around the ALM components of the tool. As of the version we have, the ability to enhance replationship types in traceability is limited. Read full review Likelihood to Renew There is too much at stake to go into a new system. But with everything else being promised as far as newer more innovative products, the justification to not renew is a huge risk so that is not a concern
Read full review Alternatives Considered I think Borland Caliber is better than
Atlassian Confluence and has way more options for ease of use and reporting.
Team Foundation Server is my personal choice as it comes as a package for developers to link to requirements easily and link to test cases. Borland Caliber is visually the least attractive of the three systems I have used. If you need just a requirement manager for tracking and reporting then Borland Caliber is a great choice.
Read full review Polarion ALM has the best usability, extensibility and reactiv product management. The support is also very good compared to other companies. Or in other words it is closer to the customer. Codebeamer is for sure also a good ALM tool with a great feature set, but existing customers are often neglected. We will see, what PTC as the new owner of codebeamer will change at this point.
Read full review Return on Investment Having Borland Caliber would be nice if you only need to track requirements and your company does not do any developing or testing. It does link very well with HP Quality Center for requirement and test asset tracking and ease of use. Borland Caliber is cheaper than a lot of other products on the market that have the same features. Read full review Many of our customers have achieved things that they could not have done without Polarion Possibility to make engineering enjoyable and not so documentation oriented (especially in regulated industries) Automatic and all the time up-to-date reporting gives savings in time Information reuse is typically giving benefits in resource use and time-to-market. Up to 40% reduction in time-to-market seen. 10-20% reduction in R&D cost is typically achievable Read full review ScreenShots