Azure DevOps Server vs. Tricentis qTest

In our case it was best suited when we started working remotely, we were able to track everything in out projects easily, able to share our codes, give reviews for the codes and also create integration and deployment CI/CD plans for the release and testing. It helped our team members with the productivity, early prototyping and release. Create summarised reports of different aspect of our projects. Even in other scenarios it is one of the best tools to use for collaboration and project management. I haven't found any specific scenario where it is not appropriate

Incentivized

Tricentis qTest integrates seamlessly with Jira, making it ideal for teams that manage user stories and defects in Jira while keeping test cases and execution in qTest. When paired with automation tools like tosca, Selenium, or WebdriverIO, qTest is excellent for aggregating both manual and automated test results in one place.

Incentivized

• Vast range of Template for Automated Build and Release Pipeline with option to have conditional triggers
• Code repository mechanism is aligned with GIT which is a well known public repository system
• Bug Management is also an integral feature of this tool
• Dashboard creation option of Build and Release pipeline is also available

Incentivized

• As a fresher, when I started using qTest it was very handy and easy to understand.
• It helps us trace the test cases that are used to test the quality in a single location
• The main thing is its integration with JIRA as soon as we create a ticket we would be getting all the requirements in the qTest so it became easy for me

• Searching through code can be somewhat cumbersome. It would be nice if there was a way to do general searches in certain areas of the system.
• Without proper training, the system can be confusing to navigate. This issue can be prevented with good training but it is something to be aware of.
• Navigation can be clunky at times depending on where you are in the system. For power users, this is not a huge deal but it is a tad bit annoying.

Incentivized

• Make it easier to delete old users from the licensing list.
• It is difficult to trace the history of a test when going between projects.
• Allow an admin to easily group tests according to their pass/fail/incomplete status so that they can be followed up on.

Incentivized

Because we are a Microsoft Gold Partner we utilize most of their software and we have so much invested in Team Foundation Server now it would take a catastrophic amount of time and resources to switch to a different product.

Incentivized

This has been a core QA management tool for our organization and integrates well with our other SDLC platforms (Azure DevOps/Jira/Katalon).

Incentivized

For standard users the interface is friendly. but if you are a manager some tools are a little confusing to use, like the query system that you always need to create from scratch. Templates should be more helpful for queries and for standard procedures that you need to duplicate PBIs over time. The search history of Work Items is a little painful to use.

Incentivized

qTest is actually intuitive and user-friendly, despite my other scathing review aspects

Incentivized

I have not had to use the support for Azure DevOps Server. There have never been any issues where I was not able to figure it out or quickly resolve. Our Scrum Master has used support before though, and the service has always been prompt and clear with a customer-focus

Incentivized

The actual answer is 0. I have never experienced worse support, whether personal or professional

Incentivized

Do research beforehand and, if possible, do a trial run before implementing into production environment.

Incentivized

Again, supporting documentation could have been a lot better

Incentivized

Azure DevOps is a fully integrated solution that solves all of the problems that our separate tools did in a much easier-to-use way. Before we implemented DevOps we had three different solutions that we had to integrate with each other and required a lot of manual intervention to make sure they worked correctly.

Incentivized

All of them offer formidable solutions in the test management realm, but each one caters to different niche and need. qTest distinguishes itself with its deep integration capabilities, especially with Agile and DevOps tools, enabling streamlined CI/CD process. Its modern, user-centric interface contrasts with ALM's more dated appearance and complex setup. While TestRail provides a clean user experience and caters to a broad spectrum of business, qTest's scalability, from SMBs to large enterprises, stands out. PractiTest's cloud-based solution is geared towards mid-sized companies, but qTest's flexibility, advanced analytics, and robust reporting grant teams actionable insights. qTest' approach to a more holistic test management closely aligning with modern software development practices

Incentivized

• It has streamlined the pipeline and project management for our agile effort.
• It has helped our agile team get organized since that is a new methodology being leveraged within the Enterprise.
• The calendar has improved visibility into different OOOs across the project team since we all come from different departments across the larger organization.

Incentivized

• Test case and requirements analysis becomes easier when you will get all test management needs in one place.
• connecting ADO,QTEST,TOSCA together helps to monitor test results and test quality on the GO
• Defect life-cycle is easier to maintain so as to ensuring a defect free system.

Incentivized