PractiTest is presented as a cloud-based test management tool that provides its customers with an end-to-end system to meet testing and QA needs. It is described by the vendor as flexible but methodological, enabling organizations to ensure visibility and communication at all levels. The solution aims to help users and project development teams streamline and manage their testing processes, while providing management with a clear and simple view of their project status at all times.
$39
user
Rally Software
Score 7.7 out of 10
N/A
Rally Software headquartered in Boulder, Colorado developed the Rally agile software development / ALM platform which was acquired by CA Technologies and rebranded as CA Agile Central. After CA's acquisition by Broadcom the software was once again rebranded as Rally.
N/A
Jile
Score 8.3 out of 10
N/A
Jile from TCS (Tata Consultany Services) is an agile devops platform, supporting users with release management and iteration planning, task management for continuous integration and delivery (CI / CD), and OKR.
$12
per month per user
Pricing
PractiTest
Rally Software
Jile
Editions & Modules
Professional
$39.00
user
Enterprise
$49.00
user
No answers on this topic
Standard Edition
$12
per month per user
Enterprise Edition
$20
per month per user
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
PractiTest
Rally Software
Jile
Free Trial
Yes
No
Yes
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Yes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
Optional
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
—
1. Standard Edition -$12 per user/per month: Ideal for organizations with multiple program and project team
2. Enterprise Edition - $20 per user/per month: Ideal for organizations with multiple portfolios
I've used many different Test Case Repository tools, and while each of them has its perks, I like the capabilities of PractiTest best. When creating a test in qTest for example, you can only input information into the fields provided, and you have everything set up in a folder …
Rally Software and Jira are both good. Rally Software is better at handling large scale projects. It offers advanced reporting, release tracking and portfolio management. Jira is more flexible but Rally Software is definitely better for large organizations. We selected Rally …
I believe that it stacks up well against any other software. There are several things they do better and there are several things it doesn't do better. However, in the end it seems all of the software can get the job done.
Rally is very good in tracking, compared with others, and also reporting is made very helpful for our business growth, tracking the deliverables, and making sure we have the proper capacity planning for completing the project in a timely manner. really Rally made us very happy …
Rally and Asana have comparable features and are both valuable project management tools, but Asana's user interface is well-organized and highly intuitive. It's easy to add tasks and collaborators, edit due dates, indicate progress on tasks, close out projects, etc. However, …
Overall, Rally Software is a better and more powerful tool than Jira for the same exact purposes. Jira cannot function as a requirements repository so it needs plugins or separate tools to do the same thing. There is no space or option to see all defects or user stories or …
We have used Jira in the past. Jira is easy to use and seems to be an industry standard. Rally is clunky and expensive. The dev side did not pick it, the business did due to its reporting capabilities.
I did not select Rally; it was chosen by the organization. If I were choosing what to use within my own team, I would use Trello. It's free, very simple to use, and has a much nicer user interface. My company previously used VersionOne however, and I prefer Rally over that …
It was a close race between JAMA, JIRA and Rally. We decided to go for JAMA as a requirements management tool and use Rally for Agile projects. The cost was another factor that made us select Rally.
Our evaluation was done many years ago, but at the time Rally provided the best mix of SCRUM-driven features, visibility and economy for our product engineering teams.
Selected because the others seemed worse two years ago when the decision was made. VersionOne seemed ugly and too restricted. Might look better now. Microsoft TFS, now VSO, looked limited but also might look better now. Microsoft is improving it at a remarkably rapid pace. Jira …
The process we used to select a tool was to create a scorecard of IT and Business stakeholder needs. We then reviewed seven tools and graded them against the scorecard requirements. We took the top two products and had a one day hands on demonstration with selected IT and …
We used CA Agile Central (formerly Rally) before but recently switched to Jira. I used jira before Rally too, and I think it was easier to manage defects in Jira. Also, I think Jira is better for teams and companies that want to implement agile/scrum life cycles. It's easier to …
We started exploring new tools, and found better adaptation of our team toward Jira. Jira provided engineers with simpler interfaces and more reliable service, even though less unnecessary features. Also the managers found in Jira better ability to eliminate noise and focus on …
I've also evaluated the following agile solutions: ActiveCollab, Agile Bench, Agilo for Scrum, Atlassian JIRA, Pivotal Tracker, SpringGround, Targetprocess. Telerik Teamprocess, VersionOne, ZebraPlan etc. If it’s time to transition to software that’s specific to your Agile …
Rally has much more features with regards to the the traditional Agile methodology and has more extensive tracking features for the project managers. Pivotal tracker was used for a smaller company and smaller teams but since my current company is larger in scale and has more to …
With Jile, teams can choose an Agile Way of Working (WoW) template that best fits their delivery needs, and then customize their WoW by turning applications on or off from a list of more than 50 applications and features. The WoW templates in Jile include Scrum, Kanban, …
For most of the test case scenarios, PractiTest works fine. If we talk about one specific feature then it would be the automation side. I like this feature a lot just because it made all testing so easy and effortless but on the other hand automation in this platform comes with so many limitations and that's where I am not fully satisfied.
Rally is well suited to help outline the specific tasks of a project, create timelines, indicate progress/status of tasks and provide views of team members' workloads. My team used it for our weekly stand up meetings in order to update one another on our progress, and our manager used it as a way to determine who had capacity for additional tasks. It facilitated our transition to a more agile work environment and we used it to implement 2 week "sprints".
Jile can be used by enterprises of any size irrespective of which part they are in the Agile journey. Jile is an Agile DevOps platform to manage end-to-end Agile planning, execution, automating your CI/CD pipeline, and delivery of value to the customers. Jile itself is a platform to manage agile planning and delivery. On the DevOps part, Jile acts as an orchestrator that integrates with market-leading tools like Cucumber, JUnit, SonarQube, and many more for the smoother deployment of the CI/CD pipeline. Jile will help you to identify bottlenecks or what went wrong during the execution of the pipeline and show you reports in this regard.
The ability to tailor the tool for each product. For example some simpler projects can be managed with simple user stories, a Kanban process and board. Large projects are managed with iterations, releases, tasks and burn down charts.
Create a home dashboard and customize it to show user stories and tasks assigned to you and a personal burn down chart.
A portfolio management capability where you can link and view the entire hierarchy from theme to initiative to feature to user story(s) and finally to tasks.
the service was intermittently down, sometimes for several hours.
Rally is a very large powerful tool, and that also is the reason why it can't be a good fit for small teams who want simpler interfaces and way less features.
loading pages is slow, add to that if you (like me) keep it open all day after signing in, the systems logs you out automatically.
pening multiple windows (on separate tabs) has some problematic issues esp. when your sessions expires, and you will need to sign in to all other tabs one by one. Also if you attempt to sign in again on one tab, all the other tabs redirect to the same page of the first tab you signed in.
a steep learning curve for agile beginners/novice team member - leaving those members to use the tool without any training makes it almost impossible for them to know what they must do to get by their daily tasks
Assuming we were paying - right now my group gets it for free as the broader engineering organization pays for it. There would be switching costs. There would be pretty minimal data migration, but the biggest cost is getting people to learn a new tool and starting off on the right footing. Evaluation and identification of the right product is a big part of switching too
Great UI, recent refresh was terrific. Great graphs and metrics, inline editing for updates, and a multitude of views on sprint progress make for a great team collaboration experience. There is also an active community and forums so that if you do need help, it is readily available
The screens render relatively quickly but many actions that you would expect to require a single click require multiple clicks and pop-up windows. The extra windows and clicks make the product feel ponderous.
The chat button is available to anyone who logs into PractiTest. In my experience, the support has always been very quick, very friendly, and very thorough. They make sure that your question is answered in a way that you understand it. They also provide documentation of best practices so you are never left hanging on what to do next.
I've had to use support only one time and my issue was eventually resolved but not because of my ticket--because others complained about the functionality taken away so they brought it back. My ticket was never answered or addressed. So I can't really say much for the support factor for Rally.
It more or less confirmed that we are using it the way they had in mind. We were hoping for a epiphany in terms of how we could use it better.
They also want to be a go to source for agile processes and have an online resource center. It’s not that great but had a couple of nuggets. It hasn’t really helped us too much and we are not too far off from the classical interpretation of agile.
I would recommend training, in particular for organizations that multiple on-going projects. The product seems optimized for larger, more complex teams and getting proper training on how to configure, administer and use the system would be beneficial
Implementation of RALLY services and program satisfaction among various group,... 1) Dev Outcomes: How were our resiliencies, development, learning & practitioners “make them do the work,” but that they ask you to do it “in a way like before. 2) The Ops group: Just wish to make sure any change won't break current production envirements All the stake holders has to be on the same page
I've used many different Test Case Repository tools, and while each of them has its perks, I like the capabilities of PractiTest best. When creating a test in qTest for example, you can only input information into the fields provided, and you have everything set up in a folder tree structure. With PractiTest, we are able to create custom fields and filter our tests based on those fields to provide more accurate information in a readily available format while quickly searching for the filter instead of through a folder tree. TestRail did not appear to meet our needs as a company. It just didn't have the potential that we found with PractiTest. Zephyr for example worked seamlessly with Jira, which is really nice since that is what we use for the most part. However since we cater to many different clients, we needed an external Test Case repository so we could use something that wasn't tied to 1 Jira instance.
Rally Software and Jira are both good. Rally Software is better at handling large scale projects. It offers advanced reporting, release tracking and portfolio management. Jira is more flexible but Rally Software is definitely better for large organizations. We selected Rally Software because our organization needed robust support for our Safe framework with detailed tracking across multiple teams and enterprise level reporting. Rally Software's ability to offer visibility into progress at all levels gave it the edge.
With Jile, teams can choose an Agile Way of Working (WoW) template that best fits their delivery needs, and then customize their WoW by turning applications on or off from a list of more than 50 applications and features. The WoW templates in Jile include Scrum, Kanban, Disciplined Agile, Large Scale Scrum, Agile Portfolio, and more. This flexibility provides an adaptive and tailored way for organizations to adopt Agile at scale across the enterprise, and digitally transform into a Business 4.0™ enterprise.
We has improved our accuracy in estimating release capacity and timelines and tracking team throughput.
Team collaboration has improved which is critical for us as teams were distributed at three locations. The Big Room Planning feature allows teams to identify the work to be done as well as dependencies and challenges. It helps team members to stay on the same page.
CA Agile Central has customized dashboards to view information in Scrum, Kanban or custom views. It helps senior management in closely tracking their releases & helps them in taking corrective action in case they feel milestones will not be met.
We are able to deliver every sprint into production since Continuous Integration environment has been setup with ease using github integration with CA Agile Central.