Overall Satisfaction with QAComplete
I have now had the opportunity to use QAComplete on two of my projects. This specific piece of software is only being used by my team per request from our client who has been using it for the past few years. At first, QA Complete can be somewhat intimidating as the user interface isn't the easiest to navigate. However, as you spend a few days using the program, you begin to understand the flow and process, which makes it very usable.
- 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.
- 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.
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.