Git vs. IBM Rational Team Concert

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Git
Score 10.0 out of 10
N/A
N/AN/A
IBM Rational Team Concert
Score 8.4 out of 10
N/A
N/AN/A
Pricing
GitIBM Rational Team Concert
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
GitIBM Rational Team Concert
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
GitIBM Rational Team Concert
Considered Both Products
Git

No answer on this topic

IBM Rational Team Concert
Chose IBM Rational Team Concert
An alternative which I have very briefly used is Atlassian's JIRA, which is very similar to IBM RTC, although has a modern UI, feels light-weight and is faster to respond and additionally has seamless integration with Bitbucket, which is a Git platform, and other Atlassian
Top Pros
Top Cons
Best Alternatives
GitIBM Rational Team Concert
Small Businesses
GitHub
GitHub
Score 9.1 out of 10
Craft
Craft
Score 8.9 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
GitHub
GitHub
Score 9.1 out of 10
ProductPlan
ProductPlan
Score 9.5 out of 10
Enterprises
Perforce Helix Core
Perforce Helix Core
Score 6.4 out of 10
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.9 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
GitIBM Rational Team Concert
Likelihood to Recommend
10.0
(36 ratings)
9.2
(13 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
10.0
(1 ratings)
6.7
(5 ratings)
Usability
9.0
(1 ratings)
8.1
(2 ratings)
Support Rating
8.5
(11 ratings)
10.0
(1 ratings)
Implementation Rating
9.0
(1 ratings)
10.0
(1 ratings)
User Testimonials
GitIBM Rational Team Concert
Likelihood to Recommend
Open Source
GIT is good to be used for faster and high availability operations during code release cycle. Git provides a complete replica of the repository on the developer's local system which is why every developer will have complete repository available for quick access on his system and they can merge the specific branches that they have worked on back to the centralized repository. The limitations with GIT are seen when checking in large files.
Read full review
IBM
While working on a complex project it is important all the needed change requests are handled in an effective manner, this tool helps us do exactly the same, it had great features to manage those change management tickets, making sure to merge the change with existing workflow, prioritize the requests centrally so there are no duplicates. Easy to collaborate across different teams and colleagues across the aisle.
Read full review
Pros
Open Source
  • Ability to create branches off current releases to modify code that can be tested in a separate environment.
  • Each developer had their own local copy of branches so it minimizes mistakes being made.
  • Has a user-friendly UI called Git Gui that users can use if they do not like using the command line.
  • Conflicts are displayed nicely so that developers can resolve with ease.
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
  • There can be quite a number of commands once you get to the advanced features and functionality of Git. Takes time to master.
  • Doesn't handle static assets (ie: videos, images, etc.) well. Although in the recent years, new functionality has been introduced to address this.
  • Many different GUIs, many people (including myself) opt to just use the command-line.
Read full review
IBM
  • IBM RTC user-interface feels very dated compared to the competition.
  • Often times we find it to be very heavy and hence is slow to respond, which is sometimes discouraging to use.
  • It lacks some of the main integrations we would like to see from a development standpoint like seamless Git integration for instance.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
Open Source
Git has met all standards for a source control tool and even exceeded those standards. Git is so integrated with our work that I can't imagine a day without it.
Read full review
IBM
One of the downsides for us was the capabilities of the native build tools were lacking. The project management and work item tracking capabilities are great and I would recommend the tool to anyone. There is a definite learning curve with RTC as a source control system, and the streams are a concept unique to the product
Read full review
Usability
Open Source
Git is easy to use most of the time. You mostly use a few commands like commiting, fetch/pull, and push which will get you by for most of time.
Read full review
IBM
There are a number of pieces to Rational Team Concert, though, with honest time working with the software, it can be easily learned while using the software on the job. While I have been an administrator for the software, and have conducted training, it is business software. It is not intended to be enjoyable as in playing a game, though it is perfectly reasonable and acceptable for the intended tasks.
Read full review
Support Rating
Open Source
I am not sure what the official Git support channels are like as I have never needed to use any official support. Because Git is so popular among all developers now, it is pretty easy to find the answer to almost any Git question with a quick Google search. I've never had trouble finding what I'm looking for.
Read full review
IBM
As I have no issues so far with IBM Rational Team Concert I recommend the team / Employer to go with it
Read full review
Implementation Rating
Open Source
It's easy to set up and get going.
Read full review
IBM
No problems
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
Open Source
I've used both Apache Subversion & Git over the years and have maintained my allegiance to Git. Git is not objectively better than Subversion. It's different.
The key difference is that it is decentralized. With Subversion, you have a problem here: The SVN Repository may be in a location you can't reach (behind a VPN, intranet - etc), you cannot commit. If you want to make a copy of your code, you have to literally copy/paste it. With Git, you do not have this problem. Your local copy is a repository, and you can commit to it and get all benefits of source control. When you regain connectivity to the main repository, you can commit against it. Another thing for consideration is that Git tracks content rather than files. Branches are lightweight and merging is easy, and I mean really easy.
It's distributed, basically every repository is a branch. It's much easier to develop concurrently and collaboratively than with Subversion, in my opinion. It also makes offline development possible. It doesn't impose any workflow, as seen on the above linked website, there are many workflows possible with Git. A Subversion-style workflow is easily mimicked.
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
Open Source
  • Git has saved our organization countless hours having to manually trace code to a breaking change or manage conflicting changes. It has no equal when it comes to scalability or manageability.
  • Git has allowed our engineering team to build code reviews into its workflow by preventing a developer from approving or merging in their own code; instead, all proposed changes are reviewed by another engineer to assess the impact of the code and whether or not it should be merged in first. This greatly reduces the likelihood of breaking changes getting into production.
  • Git has at times created some confusion among developers about what to do if they accidentally commit a change they decide later they want to roll back. There are multiple ways to address this problem and the best available option may not be obvious in all cases.
Read full review
IBM
  • RTC helps automate incident management workflow which improves our work efficiency. With the integration with Geneos and GSD, we can one click create RTC incident tickets from Geneos with most of the information copied from Geneos automatically and then link the details to GSD for privilege account management if needed.
  • RTC provides a holistic view on ad hoc production activities. We use RTC for production management. Whoever needs to get access to production due to non-planned activities (planned change is managed in GSD) has to raise an incident ticket or service request ticket in RTC so as to get production privilege accounts.
  • RTC is also being used to review and approve the usage of privilege account which help us to meet audit requirements. For example, if a user made some database change using privilege account under incident number xxx, an entry will be added in RTC and sent to account owner or production support manager to review and approve.
Read full review
ScreenShots