TrustRadius: an HG Insights company

Digital.ai TeamForge vs. OpenText Silk Central

Save this comparison

Save this comparison

Add Product

Recommended Comparisons

    Overview
    ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price

    Digital.ai TeamForge

    Score7 out of 10
    Enterprise companies (1,001+ employees)
    Digital.ai (formerly CollabNet) aims to help enterprises and government organizations deliver high-quality software at speed with TeamForge, its application lifecycle management suite. According to the vendor, Digital.ai offers innovative solutions, provides consulting and Agile training services, supports more than 10,000 customers with 6 million users in 100 countries, and has been recognized for 13 consecutive years as SD Times 100 “Best in Show” winner in the…N/A

    OpenText Silk Central

    Score7 out of 10
    N/AFormerly 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
    Pricing
    Digital.ai TeamForgeOpenText Silk Central
    Editions & Modules
    No answers on this topic
    No answers on this topic
    Offerings
    Pricing Offerings
    Digital.ai TeamForgeOpenText Silk Central
    Free Trial
    YesNo
    Free/Freemium Version
    NoNo
    Premium Consulting/Integration Services
    YesNo
    Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
    Additional Details——
    More Pricing Information
    Features
    Digital.ai TeamForgeOpenText Silk Central
    Test Management
    Comparison of Test Management features of Digital.ai TeamForge and OpenText Silk Central
    Feature
    Digital.ai TeamForge
    -
    Ratings
    OpenText Silk Central
    8.0
    1 Ratings
    1% below category average
    Centralized test management00 Ratings10.01 Ratings
    Manage test hosts and schedules00 Ratings7.01 Ratings
    Map tests to user stories00 Ratings9.01 Ratings
    Test execution reporting00 Ratings6.01 Ratings
    Best Alternatives
    Digital.ai TeamForgeOpenText Silk Central
    Small Businesses
    Polarion ALM
    Score10 out of 10
    No answers on this topic
    Medium-sized Companies
    PTC Windchill RV&S
    Score2 out of 10
    No answers on this topic
    Enterprises
    IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
    Score5 out of 10
    No answers on this topic
    All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
    User Ratings
    Digital.ai TeamForgeOpenText Silk Central
    Likelihood to Recommend
    8.0
    (2 ratings)
    7.0
    (1 ratings)
    Support Rating
    9.0
    (1 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    User Testimonials
    Digital.ai TeamForgeOpenText Silk Central
    Likelihood to Recommend
    Digital.ai (formerly XebiaLabs, CollabNet VersionOne, and Arxan)
    CollabNet TeamForge is more well-suited for technically knowledgeable users such as developers, systems analysts, QA but not for non-technical users due to the technical data used throughout the tool. CollabNet TeamForge is appropriate for most applications development. In any industry especially suited for high demand software delivery environments.
    Incentivized
    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.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Pros
    Digital.ai (formerly XebiaLabs, CollabNet VersionOne, and Arxan)
    • Code security.
    • Code migration.
    • Agile tie-in.
    Incentivized
    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.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Cons
    Digital.ai (formerly XebiaLabs, CollabNet VersionOne, and Arxan)
    • I would like to see personalization for managing artifacts, that is, allowing the user to customize pages and save personalized settings and then save them as bookmarks.
    • I would like an improved subversion browser such as a graphical user interface rather than a basic file explorer.
    • I would like built in features for CollabNet TeamForge integrated with subversion so that i can associate my private code branches and code changes.
    Incentivized
    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.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Support Rating
    Digital.ai (formerly XebiaLabs, CollabNet VersionOne, and Arxan)
    They always answer the phone when we put a call in, any time. They have consistently sent out contractors when needed and were there every step of the way when we switched over from ClearCase to TeamForge years ago. The support is what you really pay for when you buy into TeamForge.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    OpenText
    No answers on this topic
    Alternatives Considered
    Digital.ai (formerly XebiaLabs, CollabNet VersionOne, and Arxan)
    CollabNet TeamForge is superior to Mercury mainly because it has a subversion change management tool integrated with the product. CollabNet TeamForge offers more complexity but with more flexibility for managing and tracking projects. I think
    CollabNet TeamForge is more comprehensive than either Mercury and JIRA. They're all user friendly tools with short learning curves but CollabNet TeamForge is most efficient in my experience.
    JIRA was recently adopted for particular applications and is currently being evaluated by various technology teams.
    Incentivized
    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.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Return on Investment
    Digital.ai (formerly XebiaLabs, CollabNet VersionOne, and Arxan)
    • Unfortunately, I do not have access to ROI information.
    Incentivized
    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.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    ScreenShots

    Digital.ai TeamForge Screenshots

    Screenshot of TeamForge OverviewScreenshot of TeamForge Reporting DashboardScreenshot of Chef Deployment TraceabilityScreenshot of Defects Trend Report