TrustRadius: an HG Insights company

Save this comparison

Save this comparison

Add Product

Recommended Comparisons

    Overview
    ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price

    Git

    Score10 out of 10
    N/AN/AN/A

    OpenText ALM/Quality Center

    Score9.3 out of 10
    N/AOpenText™ ALM/Quality Center, formerly from Micro Focus, serves as the single pane of glass for software quality management. It helps users to govern application lifecycle management activities and implement rigorous, auditable lifecycle processes.N/A
    Pricing
    GitOpenText ALM/Quality Center
    Editions & Modules
    No answers on this topic
    No answers on this topic
    Offerings
    Pricing Offerings
    GitOpenText ALM/Quality Center
    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
    GitOpenText ALM/Quality Center
    Considered Both Products
    Open Source
    No answer on this topic
    OpenText
    No answer on this topic
    Key User Insights
    Would buy again
    100%
    Would buy again
    12 Answers
    83%
    Would buy again
    5 Answers
    Delivers good value for the price
    100%
    Delivers good value for the price
    11 Answers
    80%
    Delivers good value for the price
    4 Answers
    Happy with the feature set
    100%
    Happy with the feature set
    12 Answers
    83%
    Happy with the feature set
    5 Answers
    Lived up to sales and marketing promises
    100%
    Lived up to sales and marketing promises
    9 Answers
    No answers on this topic
    Implementation went as expected
    100%
    Implementation went as expected
    9 Answers
    No answers on this topic
    Best Alternatives
    GitOpenText ALM/Quality Center
    Small Businesses
    GitHub
    Score9.2 out of 10
    Polarion ALM
    Score10 out of 10
    Medium-sized Companies
    GitHub
    Score9.2 out of 10
    PTC Windchill RV&S
    Score2 out of 10
    Enterprises
    Perforce P4
    Score7.6 out of 10
    IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
    Score5 out of 10
    All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
    User Ratings
    GitOpenText ALM/Quality Center
    Likelihood to Recommend
    10.0
    (36 ratings)
    7.1
    (31 ratings)
    Likelihood to Renew
    10.0
    (1 ratings)
    9.0
    (2 ratings)
    Usability
    9.0
    (1 ratings)
    3.0
    (2 ratings)
    Support Rating
    8.5
    (11 ratings)
    7.4
    (2 ratings)
    Implementation Rating
    9.0
    (1 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    Ease of integration
    -
    (0 ratings)
    1.0
    (1 ratings)
    User Testimonials
    GitOpenText ALM/Quality Center
    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.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    OpenText
    For an organisation that has completely adopted SAFe structure including naming terminology, it is less appropriate and apart from that. It can suit any organisation out there, and it can solve all your problems one way or another by customising it. It is a robust and highly scalable solution to support all the business needs. It improves a lot of productivity and visibility.
    Incentivized
    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.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    OpenText
    • If you have a mix of automation & manual test suites, HPALM is the best tool to manage that. It definitely integrates very well with HP automation tools like HP Unified Functional Testing and HP LoadRunner. Automated Suites can be executed, reports can be maintained automatically. It also classifies which test suites are manual & which are automated & managers can see the progress happening in moving from manual to automated suites. In HPA ALM all the functional test suites, performance test suites, security suites can be defined, managed & tracked in one place.
    • It is a wonderful tool for test management. Whether you want to create test cases, or import it, from execution to snapshot capturing, it supports all activities very well. The linking of defects to test runs is excellent. Any changes in mandatory fields or status of the defect triggers an e-mail and sent automatically to the user that the defect is assigned to.
    • It also supports devops implementation by interacting with development tool sets such as Jenkins & GIT. It also bring in team collaboration by supporting collaboration tools like Slack and Hubot.
    • This tool can integrate to any environment, any source control management tool bringing in changes and creates that trace-ability and links between source control changes to requirements to tests across the sdlc life-cycle.
    Incentivized
    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.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    OpenText
    • The requirements module is not as user friendly as other applications, such as Blue Bird. Managing requirements is usually done in another tool. However, having the requirements in ALM is important to ensure traceability to tests and defects.
    • Reporting across multiple ALM repositories is not supported within the tool. Only graphs are included within ALM functionality. Due to size considerations, one or two projects is not a good solution. Alternatively, we have started leveraging the template functionality within ALM and are integrating with a third party reporting tool to work around this issue.
    • NET (not Octane) requires a package for deployment to machines without administrative rights. Every time there is a change, a new package must be created, which increases the time to deploy. It also forces us to wait until multiple patches have been provided before updating production.
    Incentivized
    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.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    OpenText
    I like the ease to use and its reliable.
    Incentivized
    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.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    OpenText
    Because it lets me track the test cases with detailed scenarios and is clearly separated in folders. Also the defect filter helps me filter only the ones that have been assigned to a particular area of interest. The availability of reports lets me see the essentials fields which I might be missing the data on and helps me to work on these instead of having to go through everything.
    Incentivized
    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.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    OpenText
    It is a great tool, however, it got this rating because there is a lot of learning that takes a lot longer than other tools. There are no mobile versions of ALM even with just a project summary view. I believe ALM is well capable of integration with other analytics tools that can help business solutions prediction based on current and past project data. This is Data held in ALM but with no other use apart from human reading and project progress. ALM looks like a steady platform that I believe can handle more dynamic functionality. You could add an internal communication platform that is not a third party. Limit that communication tool to specific project members.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Implementation Rating
    Open Source
    It's easy to set up and get going.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    OpenText
    No answers on this topic
    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.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    OpenText
    We have other tools in our organization like Atlassian JIRA and Microsoft Team Foundation Server, which are very capable tools but very narrow in their approach and feature set and does not come even close to the some of the core capabilities of HP ALM. HP ALM is the "System of Record" in our organization. It gives visibility for an artifact throughout the delivery chain, which cut downs unnecessary bottlenecks and noise during releases.
    Incentivized
    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.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    OpenText
    • ALM/QC has allowed for quick, traceable turnaround on relatively simple tasks
    • ALM/QC allows us to achieve our business objective of always being able to refer to a documented ticket for work being done.
    • ALM/QC navigation is not the easiest, so this aspect of the product has caused great frustration among new users.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    ScreenShots