Likelihood to Recommend
I think QAComplete is a great way to organize the literal hundreds of development bugs that are discovered throughout an agile-based project. Teams aren't always able to hotfix items on the fly and this tool provides a great repository and facility for storing and prioritizing those technical debt items that may get overlooked from sprint to sprint. It also let's everyone on the team get a clear understanding for project progress.
- Handles the administration and designation of QA hotfixes and bugs that are reported throughout multiple project groups.
- Allows for a fairly easy way to communicate statuses of bugs.
- Does a decent job of keeping team members engaged in the progress of said bugs.
- The user interface can be somewhat perplexing and difficult to navigate at times.
- Naming conventions aren't always succinct and additional training is needed by those who have more experience using the program.
- A modern refresh of the UI would help keep the product from looking dated.
Based on 1 answer
I gave QAComplete this rating because though I do feel that it is a powerful tool, it's definitely not designed for the everyday user. Obviously the target demographic is QA specialists who should be team members that are very technical and methodical in their approaches. However, for the rest of the team, it can often time prove difficult to navigate. Also, the UI is in need of a serious refresh.
Based on 1 answer
I have not had to work with their customer service directly yet. Our client has been utilizing this tool for years, so I would assume that the support they have received would be good enough to keep them wanting to continue to use the product.
We had used FogBugz and Freshdesk for quite some time. I hadn't been exposed to QAComplete until recently during a project with one of our clients, but we are already starting to see the superior benefits of this product. Once you wrap your head around the interface and navigate to the bug reports, it becomes a very powerful tool.
Return on Investment
- From our side, it's been very easy to pick up on bugs reported by our clients. It's a great ROI for the cost as they are fairly minimal in comparison to other QA software.
- I think a negative impact can be the administration of QA items. It definitely feels a bit bogged down.
- My last negative would be that I don't believe it syncs in any way with the Atlassian software suite. I could be wrong on this but manual entry from system to system can be daunting at times.
Premium Consulting/Integration Services—
Entry-level set up fee?