Introducing G2.ai, the future of software buying.Try now
Compare FitNesse and OpenText Application Quality Management 
Featured Products
Sponsored
You’re seeing this ad based on the product’s relevance to this page. Sponsored content does not receive preferential treatment in any of G2’s ratings.
Kualitee
Visit Website
Sponsored
You’re seeing this ad based on the product’s relevance to this page. Sponsored content does not receive preferential treatment in any of G2’s ratings.
Postman
Visit Website
Sponsored
You’re seeing this ad based on the product’s relevance to this page. Sponsored content does not receive preferential treatment in any of G2’s ratings.
Testiny
Visit Website
At a Glance
Market Segments
Enterprise (56.0% of reviews)
Enterprise (66.4% of reviews)
Entry-Level Pricing
No pricing available
No pricing available
FitNesse
Star Rating
(27)4.2 out of 5
Market Segments
Enterprise (56.0% of reviews)
Pros & Cons
Not enough data
Entry-Level Pricing
No pricing available
Learn more about FitNesseOpenText Application Quality Management
Star Rating
(133)4.0 out of 5
Market Segments
Enterprise (66.4% of reviews)
Pros & Cons
Entry-Level Pricing
No pricing available
Learn more about OpenText Application Quality ManagementSummary
AI Generated Summary
AI-generated. Powered by real user reviews.
- Users report that OpenText ALM Quality Center excels in its Test Repository functionality, scoring a remarkable 9.1, which allows for comprehensive management of test cases and results. In contrast, FitNesse, while offering solid features, does not have a dedicated score for this aspect, leading to a perception that it may lack depth in test management.
- Reviewers mention that OpenText ALM Quality Center's integration capabilities score 8.1, making it a strong choice for enterprises needing to connect with various tools. However, FitNesse's integration options are less highlighted, which may limit its appeal for teams relying on a diverse toolset.
- G2 users highlight that OpenText ALM Quality Center shines in its Bug Reporting features, particularly with Tester Reports & Feedback scoring 9.1, which provides detailed insights into testing outcomes. Users on G2 note that FitNesse, while functional, does not match this level of detail, potentially impacting teams that prioritize thorough bug tracking.
- Reviewers mention that OpenText ALM Quality Center's Reporting and Version Control features both score 8.9, indicating robust capabilities for managing project progress and maintaining test versions. In contrast, FitNesse lacks specific ratings in these areas, which may lead to challenges in project oversight.
- Users say that OpenText ALM Quality Center's organization and thoroughness in test management, scoring 9.7 and 9.0 respectively, are standout features that help teams maintain clarity and efficiency. FitNesse, while offering a good user experience, does not provide the same level of structured organization, which could affect larger teams.
- Users report that OpenText ALM Quality Center's quality of support, rated at 7.7, is generally reliable, although some users have noted room for improvement. FitNesse's support rating of 7.6 is comparable, but reviewers mention that the community-driven support may not always meet enterprise-level needs.
Pricing
Entry-Level Pricing
FitNesse
No pricing availableOpenText Application Quality Management
No pricing availableFree Trial
FitNesse
No trial information availableOpenText Application Quality Management
No trial information availableRatings
Meets Requirements
8.3
17
8.2
118
Ease of Use
8.1
17
7.9
118
Ease of Setup
Not enough data
7.2
61
Ease of Admin
Not enough data
7.2
59
Quality of Support
7.6
13
7.7
106
Has the product been a good partner in doing business?
Not enough data
7.7
56
Product Direction (% positive)
7.1
16
6.8
116
Features by Category
Functionality
Not enough data
9.2
10
Not enough data
8.2
10
Not enough data
9.2
10
Management
Not enough data
8.8
10
Not enough data
8.8
10
Not enough data
8.8
10
Bug Reporting
Not enough data
8.3
11
Not enough data
9.2
12
Not enough data
8.5
12
Bug Monitoring
Not enough data
9.0
12
Not enough data
9.2
12
Not enough data
8.6
11
Agentic AI - Bug Tracking
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Functionality
Not enough data
8.3
5
Not enough data
8.7
5
Not enough data
7.7
5
Not enough data
9.0
5
Automation
Not enough data
9.7
5
Not enough data
8.7
5
Not enough data
9.0
5
Agentic AI - Automation Testing
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Core Lifecycle Management - ALM Software
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Organization - ALM Software
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Agentic AI - Software Testing
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Agentic AI - AWS Marketplace
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Administration
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Communication
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Not enough data
Procedural
Not enough data
Not enough data
Categories
Categories
Shared Categories
FitNesse and OpenText Application Quality Management are categorized as Software Testing
Unique Categories
FitNesse has no unique categories
OpenText Application Quality Management is categorized as Test Management, Requirements Management, ALM Software, Bug Tracking, Automation Testing, and AWS Marketplace
Reviews
Reviewers' Company Size
FitNesse
Small-Business(50 or fewer emp.)
Mid-Market(51-1000 emp.)
Enterprise(> 1000 emp.)
OpenText Application Quality Management
Small-Business(50 or fewer emp.)
Mid-Market(51-1000 emp.)
Enterprise(> 1000 emp.)
Small-Business
(50 or fewer emp.)
Mid-Market
(51-1000 emp.)
Enterprise
(> 1000 emp.)
Reviewers' Industry
Information Technology and Services
36.0%
Computer Software
16.0%
Banking
12.0%
Financial Services
8.0%
Research
4.0%
Other
24.0%
Information Technology and Services
36.8%
Computer Software
13.6%
Banking
6.4%
Hospital & Health Care
4.0%
Financial Services
4.0%
Other
35.2%
Discussions
FitNesse has no discussions with answers
How compatible is this software in integrating it with non micro focus applications?
2 Comments
PK
This app originally named as Test director was developed by Mercury over 15 years ago. Then the it was renamed to Quality center and new owner became...Read more
OpenText Application Quality Management has no more discussions with answers
Hunting for software insights?
With over 3 million reviews, we can provide the specific details that help you make an informed software buying decision for your business. Finding the right product is important, let us help.
