Comparison

Home » Products » codeBeamer » Comparison

Compare Intland’s codeBeamer RM, QA-Test, CM and ALM with Other Products

Why codeBeamer is the most versatile Agile Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Solution?

codeBemer provides RM, TM, QA-Test modules for creating a holistic system where many other products really require separate specialized systems.

With Agile methodology we support planning/scheduling while maintaining the established discipline of Demand, Requirements, Development and Test.

ALM
Requirements Management
QA-Test Management
ALM
codeBeamer Polarion ALM PTC Integrity IBM CLM MS TFS
Gather your business ideas, prioritize/vote and capture them into Demands. Align demands (business strategy) to execution (ALM)          
Import, Define, Manage Requirements and Test specifications.          
Import Requirements from MS-Word, Edit it online, export with changes and re-import with external changes
Re-use Requirements and Test Cases. Manage Requirements and Test Case Libraries, variants     
Develop and Manage Work Items (bugs, changes, User Story, task, …)
Manage Git, SVN and Mercurial version control system and permissions
Use Agile and Waterfall processes in the same system          
Traceability from Demands, Requirements up/down to work items and source code
Version all data and changes. Holistic versioning/compare like you have time machine.
Manage, Version, Track documents. Drag and Drop documents from/to your desktop
Align your Development with the Operations. DevOps Aligns Development, Release, Operations for you          
Start with Agile Teams and scale up to your Enterprise. Scaled Agile Framework Template
Project, Processes, Workflow staging from test to production. Test locally and deploy remotely
Online and Offline project backup. Makes your compliance easy
Multi-lingual English/German/Chinese
Fully documented REST API
Named User Price $2,808 $2,988 $3,450 $4,350
Requirements Management
codeBeamer IBM Doors Polarion RM PTC Integrity
100% Web-based
Import Requirements from MS-Word, Edit it online, export with changes and re-import with external changes
MS-Word like authoring
Requirements to Release Planning
Requirements to Agile Development and Release
Requirements Based Testing
Requirements Workflows
Requirements Templates
Requirements Re-use, Libraries, Variants
Risk Management of requirements (FMEA, IEC 62304 support)
Impact Analysis and Change Management
Traceability to/from business requirements down to work items, source code, by integrated version control systems Git, SVN, Mercurial
Requirements Versioning and Baselining
Requirements Test Coverage analysis
Electronic Signature
Wiki, Document Management with Versioning and Social Collaboration
Development and Configuration Management
Test Management
Demand Management
DevOps
Online and Offline project activation
Fully documented Restful API
Multi-lingual English/German/Chinese
Named User Price $1,170 $4,500 $1,788 $3,450
QA-Test Management
codeBeamer QA-Test IBM Rational Quality Manager HP Quality Center MKS/PTC
100% Web-based
Project Management with, project templates, cross-project reporting
TestPlan, TestCase, Release, HW/SW Config, TestRun, Test Coverage
Test Libraries, Test Parametrization
Test Templates
Risk Management
Build Management, CI    
Release Management
MS Excel import & round-trip
Wiki & Social Collaboration
DevOps
Built-in ALM upgrade
Full Documented REST API
Named User Price €900 $5,000 $5,150 €2.650

Take a Look at the Full Feature List of codeBeamer

Compare codeBeamer ALM to TeamForge, Rational Team Concert, Team Foundation Server, and Atlassian products.

7 Unique Features in codeBeamer ALM
  1. A fully integrated ALM solution from a single vendor. Low operational & maintenance costs. Simple administration.
  2. Best support for Subversion and Distributed Version Control Systems. codeBeamer is the only ALM solution that supports both Git and Mercurial, the two leading Distributed Version Control Systems.
  3. Best support for distributed development processes. Execute the “Integrator workflow” effortlessly. Pulling commitments from team members, suppliers, and other contributors and pushing them out to the “stable” repository has never been so fast and easy.
  4. Most flexible process support. codeBeamer provides the most customizable issue tracking, tracker workflows, and content approval workflows in the project collaboration space.
  5. Content baselining. Capture lightweight snapshots of wiki pages and documents when reaching a milestone or an important target. Baselines can be browsed and compared after.
  6. Configuration Management Database (CMDB). Create repositories of smart configuration items, including releases, milestones, modules, hardware- and software components. Ensure ITIL compliance.
  7. Source code analysis. Measure and manage source code quality. Enforce coding standards. Detect bugs early and fix them before the problem escalates.
codeBeamer versus CollabNet TeamForge Comparison

Top 5 Reasons TeamForge Users Switch to codeBeamer

  1. The TeamForge feature set is limited and overly simplistic. Just to name a few limitations: Tasks do not support subtasks. Wiki doesn’t support plugins. Document approval workflows are hardwired.
  2. In TeamForge, there is no support for modern Distributed Version Control Systems and distributed development processes. Subversion and CVS are the user’s for Version Control System. Also, the user’s processes are required to be centralized, losing lots of organizational flexibility.
  3. They need CMDB. In TeamForge there is no support for Configuration Management concepts.
  4. They need source code analysis. In TeamForge there is no support for managing source code quality or detecting violations and problems early.
  5. TeamForge is an inpersonal tool from the 20th century. TeamForge is a tool from the pre-social-software era. It doesn’t inspire and fuel collaboration.
codeBeamer versus IBM Rational Team Concert (Jazz) Comparison

Top 5 Reasons Rational Team Concert (Jazz) Users Switch to codeBeamer

  1. Rational Team Concert is an incomplete solution: content is out of focus. Rational Team Concert focuses only on the programming aspect of software engineering. For example, it doesn’t provide solutions for requirements specification, information sharing, or for writing collaborative documentation.
  2. In Rational Team Concert, there is no support for modern Distributed Version Control Systems and distributed development processes. With the possible exception of Subversion, clearcase is the user’s only option for a Version Control System. Also, the user’s processes are required to be centralized; causing the loss of considerable organizational flexibility.
  3. They don’t offer wiki and other types of document collaboration. Rational Team Concert implementers have to allocate extra budget to integrate Rational Team Concert with Lotus or Microsoft SharePoint.
  4. Rational Team Concert is extremely expensive. The price tag says everything. Note especially what’s included and what costs extra.
  5. Missing features in Rational Team Concert? Buy other expensive IBM products! The user can expect the total cost of ownership to escalate.
codeBeamer versus Microsoft Team Foundation Server (TFS) Comparison

Top 5 Reasons Team Foundation Server (TFS) Users Switch to codeBeamer

  1. Team Foundation Server is available only on expensive Microsoft infrastructure. The user’s only option is to run TFS on a Windows Server, with MS SQL Server and Active Directory. There is no support for other operating systems databases or LDAP solutions.
  2. In Team Foundation Server, there is no support for modern Distributed Version Control Systems and Distributed Development Processes. Microsoft TFVC is the user’s only option for a Version Control System. Also, the user’s processes are required to be centralized; thus losing a lot of organizational flexibility.
  3. Process support is limited in Team Foundation Server. The inflexible workflow configuration does not enable customizing Team Foundation Server to the user’s business and development processes.
  4. They need a solution for Agile methodologies and practices. Practicing Agile (Scrum and Kanban, primarily) is an unresolved problem in Team Foundation Server.
  5. They need CMDB. In Team Foundation Server, there is no support for Configuration Management concepts.
codeBeamer versus Atlassian JIRA + Confluence + Bamboo + Crowd Comparison

Top 6 Reasons Atlassian JIRA+Confluence+Bamboo Users Switch to codeBeamer

  1. With Atlassian products, certain key functionality is available only by purchasing additional commercial plugins. Escalation management and approval workflows, for example, are available only at extra cost and at the cost of dependence on external vendors.
  2. Within Atlassian products, certain key functionality is available only by using unsupported plugins. Git and Mercurial integration are available only if the user can afford the risk of operating a Version Control System without product support.
  3. They need real Document Management. With Atlassian products, there is no efficient way for sharing versioned documents on the web.
  4. They need CMDB. With Atlassian products, there is no support for Configuration Management concepts.
  5. They need source code analysis. With Atlassian products, there is no support for managing source code quality, or detecting violations and problems early.
  6. License price != total costs. Atlassian products might seem inexpensive upon first inspection. But, by the time the user buys all components to build a complete ALM solution, including those from external vendors, the total cost of ownership will be high.