Digital.ai TeamForge vs. SpiraPlan vs. Trimble ProjectSight

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

We selected SpiraPlan because the workflow allows us to start simple without adopting an entire methodology. It suits small teams and single users really well.

I would probably recommend Trimble ProjectSight (Prolog) over Procore, as it is an easier user interface and typically avoids any problems with the users. I would say that it does take some getting used to, but once you are used to it it is pretty easy to use. This would be good for a residential home in construction.

Incentivized

• Code security.
• Code migration.
• Agile tie-in.

Incentivized

• Flexible requirements organisation structure. I'm able to group and sub-group requirements as I see fit.
• Competitive product pricing. Paying by active use instead of registered user was the winning point.
• UI is straightforward and easy to use.

• Change orders: great way to send and document official communications to subs and clients.
• Drawings: always good to have drawings and info readily available.

Incentivized

• 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

• Access from South East Asia is rather sluggish. Could be due to server location.
• Complimentary phone app to do simple tasks (e.g. create tasks, create requirements, add comments) offline would be beneficial because access to the internet can be an issue at the customer's environment.

• speed. Some items take a bit long to bring up.
• more direct use for individual specifications

Incentivized

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

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

Main differentiating factors: 1. Lightweight process 2. Plans based on active users instead of registered users.

I have only used Procore otherwise, and from what I remember Procore does not have as many features in terms of keeping track of CD documents, and organizing RFI's like Trimble does. I think overall Trimble ProjectSight (Prolog) is a better product, and if it was up to me I would pick Trimble ProjectSight (Prolog) over Procore.

Incentivized

• Unfortunately, I do not have access to ROI information.

Incentivized

• Allows us to manage simple IT requirements without major upfront costs. Allows us to expand our process complexity at our own pace.
• Slow UI response from a South East Asia country can make data entry a drag.

• Positive: kept jobs running smoothly, awesome tool to track and oversee projects
• Negative: not much really, good tool, just very in-depth with information that is needed to fill in documentation

Incentivized