Atlassian Bitbucket vs. OpenText Dimensions CM

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Bitbucket
Score 8.5 out of 10
N/A
Bitbucket is a Git repository and code collaboration platform, featuring automated testing and code deployment. Bitbucket Cloud Premium provides AI-powered development, more granular access controls, and enforced code quality, and Bitbucket Data Center provides a self-hosted option.
$0
for up to 5 users
OpenText Dimensions CM
Score 8.0 out of 10
N/A
Dimensions CM is Software Change and Configuration Management for Agile development, developed by Serena Software and now sold by OpenText.N/A
Pricing
Atlassian BitbucketOpenText Dimensions CM
Editions & Modules
Free
$0
for up to 5 users
Standard
$3.30
per month per user
Premium
$6.60
per month per user
Bitbucket Data Center
starting at $44,000
per year 1 - 500
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
BitbucketOpenText Dimensions CM
Free Trial
YesNo
Free/Freemium Version
YesNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Atlassian BitbucketOpenText Dimensions CM
Considered Both Products
Bitbucket
Chose Bitbucket
The majority of SCM tools are Git based. What makes this solution stand out from the rest is it's web-based interface, which implements version control standards very intuitively. As a result, the learning curve shortens and productivity is highly improved.
Chose Bitbucket
I didn't choose Bitbucket, but I hypothesize that my company chose it partly for its phenomenal integration with other Atlassian products such as Jira. Bitbucket has GitHub as a worthy competitor, but in my opinion, there are no real Jira Software competitors.
Chose Bitbucket
At the time, the licensing was cheaper than the other options, and integrating with Jira was a plus.
Chose Bitbucket
I have used Gitlab and Github in the past. While Gitlab is good if you are finding an open source solution for your code management and Github is good for the open source contribution, Bitbucket is an ideal choice to build an enterprise level product. The ecosystem that Jira …
Chose Bitbucket
I have used GitHub and GitLab before working on Bitbucket. There is no huge reason to choose Bitbucket over others. The only thing I like more about Bitbucket is security and user interface!
Chose Bitbucket
When we make the choice of using BitBucket at that time we didn't have a choice. It was better than GitHub but nowadays GitHub is not just a source control tool it's a DevOps platform. If we talk about GitLab it is even better than GitHub. We're in the process to phase out …
Chose Bitbucket
The main reason why we choose Bitbucket is because they provide a secure way to save the code using private repositories. The Access control is easy to setup too
Chose Bitbucket
Bitbucket is perfect for our business because it allows us to work on private projects and integrate seamlessly with our existing tools. They also provide a nice app called Sourcetree to help developers work on git environments without experience with git command-line …
Chose Bitbucket
When GitHub was acquired by Microsoft my previous organization had concerns about paywalls and additional restrictions that might be placed on the projects. We had made a move to Bitbucket as a result. The acquisition didn't seem to have any implications on the overall …
Chose Bitbucket
For the features we were looking at, Bitbucket, GitHub and GitLab were all at par and were in a similar price range. We found that GitHub was the most full featured should we need to scale very quickly. GitLab was at par with GitHub for our future needs, but GitHub was a more …
Chose Bitbucket
1. Github is open source and also many security vulnerabilities because it is open source. That's one of the main reasons we chose BitBucket.
2. BitBucket integrates natively with other Atlassian tools without any custom configurations.
Chose Bitbucket
I have used Tortoise SVN in the past with various teams. Tortoise SVN is open-source and has a lot of valuable functionality built in. That being said, Bitbucket is more user-friendly being that there is a decent user interface. The UI is not great, but it still makes working …
Chose Bitbucket
Bitbucket integrates with Confluence and Jira more easily than GitHub, which was a plus for us, given that we already used those tools extensively. Additionally, the pricing structure for Bitbucket makes it more affordable for our organization, which is especially important, …
Chose Bitbucket
Gitlab provides lesser features compared to Github.
Gitlab/GitHub are both from a different company (Atlassian), which makes it tough to interrelate projects with other task management tools offered by Atlassian.
Chose Bitbucket
Github is a good repository to store and share code files. But Github is open to the community and public. But keeping the research codes private before publication is possible in Bitbucket.
Chose Bitbucket
Bitbucket is good for private repositories and reliable CI/CD integration but it's getting behind Github which every day has more and more integrations and which in my opinion has a larger customer group. Gitlab also offers some good support for private repositories but the …
Chose Bitbucket
It doesn’t stack up against them. It is widely used because it comes in a great package with other Atlassian tools.
Chose Bitbucket
We did select Bitbucket for a bit, but then we eventually moved away from using JIRA to different tools and as a result, it made more sense to move our source code to GitHub since it provides more features and is just much easier to use as everyone already knows how to use …
Chose Bitbucket
All 3 software works well for development and source code control, but for sure Bitbucket is the easiest to be set up and be deployed among the team. The integration with JIRA makes this a powerful tool against coding-only applications. However, for open source, it would be …
Chose Bitbucket
Of the three, we mostly use Gitlab the most. I don't know why as I was not part of the selection process. But if I'm to guess, this is an organization preference. Our company uses Bitbucket the most, while our partners either use Gitlab the most and sometimes ButBucket. But if …
Chose Bitbucket
At the time of making the selection, Bitbucket offered free private repositories when no one else did. This was the primary motivator. With GitHub, you can now have free private repositories on personal accounts, but organizations must still pay for private accounts. Overall …
Chose Bitbucket
Bitbucket was my repo host of choice when it came to private repos, but now that GitHub offers free private repos I’ll probably just use them. If you want to manage branch protection though you’ll need a Pro membership for GitHub whereas it was free with Bitbucket.
Chose Bitbucket
I think Gitlab and Bitbucket are very similar. I am very familiar with git commands so its easy for me to use both. But I would still prefer Gitlab since it has few additional features like send merge request, approvers etc.
Chose Bitbucket
From a cost standpoint, Bitbucket is the winner if you fall outside of the ability to use the Github and Gitlab free tiers. Both of those solutions have their own merits, but from a cost saving perspective Bitbucket is more than likely going to be the most effective option.
Chose Bitbucket
Bitbucket uses Git as a client which is more advanced with lots of features for source code management tool. It is very easy to scale horizontally as per our needs, and recent new features like adding multiple file systems keep Bitbucket more useful. Due to multiple file …
OpenText Dimensions CM
Chose OpenText Dimensions CM
Serena CM is superior to Microsoft Team Foundation Server (TFS) in overall functionality, but does not have very good native integration with Microsoft. Therefore in a Microsoft centric shop with no audit needs ,TFS would be better. Otherwise I would choose Serena CM.
Features
Atlassian BitbucketOpenText Dimensions CM
Version Control Software Features
Comparison of Version Control Software Features features of Product A and Product B
Atlassian Bitbucket
8.2
Ratings
0% above category average
OpenText Dimensions CM
-
Ratings
Branching and Merging9.30 Ratings00 Ratings
Version History9.70 Ratings00 Ratings
Version Control Collaboration Tools9.60 Ratings00 Ratings
Pull Requests9.90 Ratings00 Ratings
Code Review Tools4.20 Ratings00 Ratings
Project Access Control9.90 Ratings00 Ratings
Automated Testing Integration4.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Issue Tracking Integration8.70 Ratings00 Ratings
Branch Protection8.50 Ratings00 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Atlassian BitbucketOpenText Dimensions CM
Small Businesses
Git
Git
Score 10.0 out of 10
Salt
Salt
Score 6.2 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
Git
Git
Score 10.0 out of 10
Salt
Salt
Score 6.2 out of 10
Enterprises
Perforce P4
Perforce P4
Score 7.7 out of 10
Perforce P4
Perforce P4
Score 7.7 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Atlassian BitbucketOpenText Dimensions CM
Likelihood to Recommend
9.0
(0 ratings)
9.0
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
10.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Usability
9.5
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
8.3
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Atlassian BitbucketOpenText Dimensions CM
Likelihood to Recommend
As a team we need to push code into the repo on daily basis, Bitbucket has proven that is a reliable and secure server to save and get the code available in no time. The administration part is really easy and there's an extra tool for every developer profile either if you want to use the console or a GUI like Sourcetree.
Read full review
Serena CM is well suited to highly controlled, audited, and process driven environments. It will allow strict segregation of duties, and change traceability. If implemented correctly it will help you quickly build trusts with your auditors. It is also well suited to environments that require constant branching and merging. Due to the complexity of the product and learning curve for your development and operations team it may be overkill in a small shop with loose rules
Read full review
Pros
  • Free private repositories for small teams - this is great to save costs relative to other options
  • They have some robust (although sometimes confusing) team and project management tools
  • They have built out many pipeline and integrations, but we did not use these
Read full review
  • Code Promotion: Dimensions CM allows supervisors to control changes to code, in that they delegate requests to developers, and act as a gatekeeper prior to promoting to the next environment. This functionality is configurable so you can set up a workflow that best fits the structure and requirements of your own company.
  • Code Repository for changes and versioning: Code can be checked out by item or by synchronizing folders. Code revisions can be compared against other revisions or work files. Item histories show which developers made which modifications, and which supervisor and operations personnel were involved in assigning the request and promoting the code to each environment. Additionally a pedigree will show a stream diagram which graphically displays branches and merges.
  • Deployment: Serena Change Management offers help automating deployment including integrations with SVN and Jenkins. Its newer versions also have a powerful graphical deployment automation tool (Serena Deployment Automation- SDA). It comes with a certain amount of licenses built-in. If you have a many nodes to deploy to there will be separate licensing costs for that.
Read full review
Cons
  • While it integrates flawlessly with other Atlassian products, it's lacking in 3rd party integrates, especially compared to competitors like GitHub and GitLab
  • Using Jira for issues gives a lot of power, but it's also a lot of overhead and complexity that may or may not be necessary for your organization. It also puts issues in another tool, adding a little friction when it comes to addressing issues in your code
  • Searching for and discovering other projects and GitHub isn't quite as intuitive or easy to use as competitors
Read full review
  • The only major negative that I have encountered with Serena CM product is that the very power and flexibility of the tool means there is a risk that you will make a mess of things. In other words it gives you plenty of rope to tangle yourself with. I recommend careful, well thought out deployments implementing the built in roles and workflows that can be turned on and configured, using a consistent methodology.
  • My experience with the Serena help desk support has not been impressive. Though reasonably polite and diligent, the technicians were well trained, and often gave bad advise and terrible scripts. On several occasions I had to rewrite scripts they have me; if I had run them as provided they would have caused even more difficulties than the problem I was trying to solve. I speak of the support in the past tense because I conditioned myself not to call them, it was usually just easier to solve nay problems my self. They do have a good account management team though, and for any major issues you can go thru them.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
All products have room for improvement. The system improves over time with better and better integrations and I look forward to even more features without paying extra! The system has increased transparency across my organization and with this transparency comes increased throughput on projects. I don't think I can go back to any other system and we are definitely married to this product.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Usability
The architecture of Bitbucket makes it more easily scalable than other source code management repositories. Also, administration and maintaining the instance is very easy. It integrates with JIRA and other CI/CD applications which makes it more useful to reduce the efforts. It supports multiple plugins and those bring a lot of extra functionality. It increases the overall efficiency and usefulness of Bitbucket.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Support Rating
The customer support provided by Atlassian (Bitbucket's parent company that also makes Jira, Confluence, etc.) is very helpful. They seem to be very concerned about any issues reported with their products and even just questions about functionality. They are constantly improving the products with new features in nearly every release. Plus they have a plethora of online documentation to reference.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Alternatives Considered
For the features we were looking at, Bitbucket, GitHub and GitLab were all at par and were in a similar price range. We found that GitHub was the most full featured should we need to scale very quickly. GitLab was at par with GitHub for our future needs, but GitHub was a more familiar tool compared to GitLab. Bitbucket won out because of its close integration with Jira and being in the Atlassian family. It was also cheaper than GitHub. As we started with Jira, Bitbucket addition became a natural next step for us. We really liked Bitbucket and stayed with it but we do know we have great options in the form of GitHub and GitLab should we need to scale fast.
Read full review
Serena CM is superior to Microsoft Team Foundation Server (TFS) in overall functionality, but does not have very good native integration with Microsoft. Therefore in a Microsoft centric shop with no audit needs ,TFS would be better. Otherwise I would choose Serena CM
Read full review
Return on Investment
  • The overall return on investment is very high compared to other source code management tools.
  • Having a subscription model only is making BitBucket's cost of ownership very high over the years. There should be an alternative option for the purchase of a license permanently (like proprietary software).
  • Paying separately for premium support is not a good idea. Premium support should be part of the package itself.
  • No local or on-call support available in Singapore and many other countries is also painful. There should be some local presence, at least in their leading market countries like Singapore.
Read full review
  • Serena has facilitated our annual completion of various audit and technology control certifications. These certifications make a huge difference to our company's reputation and bottom line.
  • There has been no negative impact on our company.
Read full review
ScreenShots