We just raised a $30M Series A: Read our story

Compare Jira vs. Micro Focus ALM Quality Center

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Jira Logo
Read 118 Jira reviews.
54,609 views|47,623 comparisons
Featured Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Jira vs. Micro Focus ALM Quality Center and other solutions. Updated: November 2021.
554,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros
"Our company follows the Agile methodology for software development, and this product is one of the best tools for companies that do so.""I can use Jira Query Language (JQL) to write queries to see the stories that are there for the current sprint. I can also sort them by assignment. I also use Jira is for burndown charts, which give an indication of how efficiently the squad is performing. I also use the Active Sprints function and a feature called Planning Poker.""This is our way of communicating with different teams. We are a global company. I am based in San Diego, for example. A lot of the BAs are based in Paris. The development team is based in Minsk. We absolutely need to be in constant communication and on the same page.""It's easy to understand, and easy to navigate.""What I find valuable about Jira is that it's an ecosystem. Sometimes, it does not provide the best in class solutions, but it's so well integrated. You will not have many problems with integration.""We can create multiple boards for the same product backlogs.""Jira has a useful user interface and overall is easy to understand and learn.""JIRA's technical support is absolutely fantabulous. I had used it in the past when I was working at my previous organization. And when we wanted to link it with a framework, they helped us out with the API we were looking for."

More Jira Pros »

"Within Quality Center, you have the dashboard where you can monitor your progress over different entities. You can build your own SQL query segments, and all that data is there in the system, then you can make a dashboard report.""It has a brand new look and feel. It comes with a new dashboard that looks nice, and you can see exactly what you have been working with.""The initial setup is straightforward. It's not too hard to deploy.""The test-case repository and linkage through to regression requirements will absolutely be a key component for us. We haven't got it yet, but when we've got an enterprise regression suite, that will be a key deliverable for them. We will be able to have all of the regression suite in one place, linked to the right requirements.""Defect management is very good.""Ability to customize modules, particularly Defect Tracking module on company specific needs""The setup is pretty straightforward.""The stability is very good."

More Micro Focus ALM Quality Center Pros »

Cons
"Tracking is important but the built-in features don't meet our needs.""I am not sure if Jira can be integrated with our ERP. We have our ERP for the cost estimates or measurements. It would be nice if we can check or view a plan with the real cost. Currently, we have to do a double check of costs. It would be better to be able to integrate it with Jira.""Pretty much 70% - 80% of the Next-Gen Projects features are still to be developed.""Could offer an improved user experience.""This solution could be improved by including a different model for the overall planning perspective. There's a Jira portfolio that we aren't using. The only challenge we're facing is that we cannot see the overall planning.""Having more seamless integration with Confluence would really help us track our product management activity and other product details in one place.""The Classic UI is a little bit messy. UX experience is also a little bit messy and is not according to the expectation of a tech user.""We would like to see the integration of a lite-version of Confluence, just to manage some of the templates and documents."

More Jira Cons »

"There's room for improvement on the reporting side of things and the scheduling, in general, is a bit clunky.""The version of Micro Focus ALM that we use only works through Internet Explorer (IE). We have to communicate to everyone that they can only use IE with the solution. This is a big limitation. We should be free to use any type of browser or operating system. We have customers and partners who are unable to log into the system and enter their defects because they work on a different operating system.""Only Internet Explorer is supported. That is a big problem. They don't support Chrome and Firefox and so on.""The UFT tests don't work very well and it seems to depend on things as simple as the screen resolution on a machine that I've moved to.""If they could improve their BPT business components that would be good""The solution needs to offer support for Agile. Currently, ALM only supports Waterfall.""HP-QC does not support Agile. It is designed for Waterfall. This is the number one issue that we're facing right now, which is why we want to look for another tool. We're a pharmaceutical services company, so we require electronic signatures in a tool, but this functionality isn't available in HP-QC. We don't have 21 CFR, Part 11, electronic signatures, and we need compliant electronic signatures. Some of the ALM tools can toggle between tabular format and document format for requirements, but the same feature is not available in this solution. There is also no concept of base-lining or versioning. It doesn't exist.""The uploading of test scripts can get a little cumbersome and that is a very sensitive task. They could improve on that a lot. It's really important that this gets better as I'm loading close to a thousand test scripts per cycle."

More Micro Focus ALM Quality Center Cons »

Pricing and Cost Advice
"Its price is fine, but we would like it to be less expensive. We are paying on a yearly basis.""We used to be on a perpetual license provided by our clients.""As a company, we get a subsidized price, and it's lower than what's quoted on their website.""I am not sure if the client is using a commercial version. I think it is on a per-user basis, and it is around 15 Canadian dollars for a user, but I'm not sure. It also has a free version.""We are using the enterprise license which is nice because it ensures that we always have the latest versions of Jira software.""The basic price of Jira is reasonable, but for each plugin, we have to keep paying more. When you add it all up, it can be expensive. The main problem we face is we are forced to purchases plugin licenses for users who are not going to use them. For example, we have Jira licenses for approximately 450 people but if we only want a purchase a plugin for few people it is mandatory to buy the license for the 450 people who have Jira licensees. This is a problem because sometimes we need plugins for the product manager or for people in charge of the report, not everyone. For us, it can be very expensive in the end, they should alter this policy to allow plugins for only a set number of licenses.""We are a regional research and education institute. We're using the free license provided for educational institutes.""There are no additional costs to the standard licensing."

More Jira Pricing and Cost Advice »

"I've never been in the procurement process for it. I don't think it is cheap. Some of the features can be quite expensive.""It all comes down to how many people are going to access the tool. When teams go above 20, I think ALM is a better tool to use from a collaboration and streamlining perspective.""Quality Center is pricey, but cheaper is not always less expensive.""It is very expensive as compared to other tools. We didn't get their premier version. It is a lesser version, and to upgrade, there will be an additional cost for us.""The solution has the ability to handle a large number of projects and users in an enterprise environment with the correct license.""Pricing is managed by our headquarters. I am able to get from them for very cheap. The market price is horribly expensive.""Most vendors offer the same pricing, though some vendors offer a cheaper price for their cloud/SaaS solution versus their on-premise. However, cloud/SaaS solutions result in a loss of freedom. E.g., if you want to make a change, most of the time it needs to be validated by the vendor, then you're being charged an addition fee. Sometimes, even if you are rejected, you are charged because it's a risk to the entire environment.""Compared to the market, the price is high."

More Micro Focus ALM Quality Center Pricing and Cost Advice »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions are best for your needs.
554,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Questions from the Community
Top Answer: Hi Netanya, Basically , it all depends on the use cases for your environment and the business needs. Hope the below data may be relevant to you for identifying your needs and deciding on the… more »
Top Answer: Jira is a great centralized tool for just about everything, from local team management to keeping track of products and work logs. It is easy to implement and navigate, and it is stable and scalable… more »
Top Answer: In general, the GUI is nice.
Top Answer: Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is a very good test management tool especially for writing test cases and uploading. You can even upload the test cycles from Excel. You get the defects and the reports… more »
Top Answer: I've never been in the procurement process for it. I don't think it is cheap. Some of the features can be quite expensive.
Top Answer: In terms of places for improvement, Micro Focus is an expensive tool. We see nowadays that there are other products coming, and Micro Focus is more expensive and there are lots of license costs. Lots… more »
Ranking
Views
54,609
Comparisons
47,623
Reviews
115
Average Words per Review
551
Rating
8.1
Views
16,224
Comparisons
9,976
Reviews
28
Average Words per Review
1,025
Rating
7.3
Comparisons
Also Known As
Jira Software
HPE ALM, Quality Center, Quality Center, Micro Focus ALM
Learn More
Overview

JIRA has multiple deployment options to provide the flexibility your organization needs.

Cloud is a fully hosted service for customers who want to iterate quickly and have us take care of managing the infrastructure.

For customers who need to run our applications behind their firewall, we have Server and Data Center options. Server delivers greater capacity for a larger user base and gives you more control, allowing you to remain compliant with your enterprise IT, security, IP and privacy policies. For our largest customers, Data Center provides all the capability of our Server option, along with high availability, instant scalability and performance at scale.

Atlassian also offers premium support and strategic services for enterprise customers. Technical Account Managers are cross-functional technical advisors providing proactive planning and strategic guidance across your organization. Premier Support goes above and beyond our standard offerings to give you account-wide support from a team of senior support engineers.

Micro Focus ALM/Quality Center serves as the single pane of glass to govern software quality and implement rigorous, auditable lifecycle processes. Designed for complex multi-application environments, organizations can achieve high efficiency in their testing and measure quality with a requirements-driven and risk-based testing approach. Advanced reporting provides a complete view across all releases to gain new insights and make informed decisions. With numerous deployment options, open integrations with common tools and strong data controls, ALM/Quality Center is a perfect choice for enterprises that need to enforce standards, ensure compliance and adapt to changing tools.

Learn more:

Offer
Learn more about Jira
Learn more about Micro Focus ALM Quality Center
Sample Customers
Square, Nasa, eBay, Cisco, SalesForce, Adobe, BNP Paribas, BMW and LinkedIn, Pfizer, Citi.
Airbus Defense and Space, Vodafone, JTI, Xellia, and Banco de Creìdito e Inversiones (Bci)
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Computer Software Company19%
Financial Services Firm16%
Insurance Company9%
Manufacturing Company8%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company27%
Comms Service Provider18%
Manufacturing Company7%
Financial Services Firm7%
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm20%
Comms Service Provider13%
Healthcare Company10%
Insurance Company9%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company32%
Comms Service Provider13%
Financial Services Firm10%
Government6%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business30%
Midsize Enterprise20%
Large Enterprise50%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business21%
Midsize Enterprise16%
Large Enterprise63%
REVIEWERS
Small Business14%
Midsize Enterprise14%
Large Enterprise73%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business7%
Midsize Enterprise15%
Large Enterprise78%
Find out what your peers are saying about Jira vs. Micro Focus ALM Quality Center and other solutions. Updated: November 2021.
554,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Jira is ranked 1st in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 118 reviews while Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is ranked 4th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 28 reviews. Jira is rated 8.0, while Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of Jira writes "Great for collaboration, very stable, and extracting data is straightforward". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Micro Focus ALM Quality Center writes "Makes it easy to go back and execute the same test every time with automation". Jira is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, Micro Focus ALM Octane, TFS, IBM Rational DOORS and Polarion ALM, whereas Micro Focus ALM Quality Center is most compared with Micro Focus ALM Octane, Microsoft Azure DevOps, Tricentis qTest, TFS and Zephyr Enterprise. See our Jira vs. Micro Focus ALM Quality Center report.

See our list of best Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites vendors.

We monitor all Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.