I work closely with coders at my company when developing software to make everyone's lives easier in the workspace. We have been using Helix ALM to ensure these are always state-of-the-art developments and it has proved to be reliable so far.

I don't have any complaints about this service.

Great, used on numerous projects. I prefer it vs a number of other tools I've used: Doors, Confluence, Jira, Jama, Matrix, Trello, Rational, and in house custom.

There are numerous packages out there but few that are all in one - one support center packages like Perforce Helix. People often forget that the biggest investment is the user's learning time and having s flexible tool with strong support and ownership is essential. Many other tool packages depend on email or user group/forum support that is unpredictable for each of the "linked" parts of the tool set. I've spend many hours to days trying to find help for problems on some of these. That said, I like that Helix in "insanely configurable", flexible and strongly supported with phone center, tutorials, examples and templates.

Round tripping items with MS tools as Word & Excel somewhat cumbersome. Editing in Helix vs familiar MS Word limited.

nothing about this product can be said to be good , it is old , cumbersome and clunky . the product needs to be refactored and replaced

poor reports - difficult to create can not have different type of issues does not really support scrum approach

centralized requirement, bug and test tracking with a complete audit trail of edits, as well as "easy" automatically updating trace matrices.

Captures requirements, bugs and testing all in one place, instant update so people are all using the most up to date version, easy to add new users and licenses, can update fields and text easily to better suit project needs,

Word export challenges mean that the team won't use the export feature any more and instead has to make the update twice - once in the ALM and once in our "official" word version Test case and Test Run setup isn't WYSIWIG when embedding images into test steps, greatly annoying my developers Test Run system is not adaptable to mechanical testing, where there is one test setup and then many samples to run on a simple test (like a pull test) - so we have testing in multiple places. Validation overhead for medical device software tool requirements means we can't easily update (which means we can't update without spending on re-validation) The tool is not particularly user-friendly - I've used it for years and know where almost everything is, but new users, particularly less tech-savvy ones, have an extremely difficult time moving items through the workflow and executing tests in the system.

Through this software, I was able to successfully document software specifications that were linked against test cases, and ultimately used for test runs. This allowed our team to much better understand just how much more work was required to be done and how far along we were in terms of the QA testing.

The software contains good functionality for linking various bits of information together between the different modules that we use (requirements, test case management, defect tracking). It's also has the flexibility to be configured to work with many different kinds of workflows (we know because we've gone through a number of different design processes over the years that we've used this).

The text editing is the portion of the software that I like the least. Copying and pasting seems to mangle linefeeds, building up a nested list of bullets has inconsistent behavior, and trying to create/edit a table is incredibly awkward. The text editor is still functional, but it's fallen below the minimum expectations for a text editor in this day and age.