Azure DevOps Services vs. FogBugz

ADO is well suited for the visibility of day-to-day tasks and responsibilities as well as things such as Features, user stories, etc. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any scenario where it might not be well suited, as you can customize ADO to your liking to a degree.

Fogbugz is great for case-and-task based businesses. If your business has hundreds of weekly anticipated tasks that exist, such as processes to get files converted, Fogbugz can manage these processes very well. For our team, we knew each week that we would have about 500 tasks or orders to get processed. Fogbugz helped us break down these projects, get them assigned evenly throughout the team, and easily see who is working on what task. FogBugz is also good for tracking unanticipated tasks like bugs, making notes, flowcharts, and categorizing if the problem is a bug, feature request, etc. For us, it was just the best at nailing down those anticipated tasks.

Incentivized

• Flexible Requirements Hierarchy Management: AZDO makes it easy to track items such as features or epics as a flat list, or as a hierarchy in which you can track the parent-child relationship.
• Fast Data Entry: AZDO was designed to facilitate quick data entry to capture work items quickly, while still enabling detailed capture of acceptance criteria and item properties.
• Excel Integration: AZDO stands out for its integration with MS Excel, which enables quick updates for bulk items.

Incentivized

• Good for documenting
• Good for attaching things

Incentivized

• Need to make the changes so that it doesn't occupy most of the CPU utilization and memory
• Execution of Bulky SQl Queries leads to either the SQl being out of exception or the VS being unresponsive
• Integration with Microsoft products is easy, but with non-Microsoft products it is more difficult, and you have to make a lot of configuration changes to integrate
• With every upgrade of the Visual Studio, like from VS 2010 to VS 2013 , we need to upgrade our hardware/machine, as the VS hardware requirement also increases
• If code is getting compiled in one visual studio, like in VS 2010, that the same code could possibly give an error when compiled in VS 2013, due to certain changes in keyword, data format, etc., with the VS upgrade

Incentivized

• Workflow capability is very limited to the original implementation, could use a refresh and extension of the capabilities
• UI/UX needs improvement. This was in the works prior to purchase by DevFactory, and has taken a back seat to backend improvements that rightfully needed to be fixed first.
• Pricing model doesn't fit our usage very well, so we're paying for full-featured users for everyone even though the majority of Users only need to submit Cases and modify the Wikis, and our small percentage of Users are in Dev and need all features.

Incentivized

I don't think our organization will stray from using VSTS/TFS as we are now looking to upgrade to the 2012 version. Since our business is software development and we want to meet the requirements of CMMI to deliver consistent and high quality software, this SDLC management tool is here to stay. In addition, our company uses a lot of Microsoft products, such as Office 365, Asp.net, etc, and since VSTS/TFS has proved itself invaluable to our own processes and is within the Microsoft family of products, we will continue to use VSTS/TFS for a long, long time.

Incentivized

Azure DevOps is a powerful, complex cloud application. As such there are a number of things it does great and something where there is room for improvement. One of those areas would be in usability. In my opinion it relies too much on search. There is no easy way to view all projects or to group them in a logical way. You need to search for everything.

Incentivized

When we've had issues, both Microsoft support and the user community have been very responsive. DevOps has an active developer community and frankly, you can find most of your questions already asked and answered there. Microsoft also does a better job than most software vendors I've worked with creating detailed and frequently updated documentation.

Incentivized

Was not part of the process.

Incentivized

Jira is fantastic for project management and customer facing portal. It is not good for pure development (no integration with Git, pipeline management, automated testing features). If DevOps were to integrate and adopt the project features of Jira as well as the customer facing interfaces, I feel it would be a complete project management system.

Incentivized

FogBugz is made for the Developers who actually use it every day, while JIRA is made for the C-Suite who oversees them but has little idea of the finer points of daily dev tasks. In reality, most don't fit into the mold of JIRA tickets, and the summarized information that C-Suite is reviewing is incomplete or skewed. There is also an outstanding issue since 2004 that JIRA refuses to implement despite wide user support, the merging of tickets. You can see the open ticket with the JIRA team here: https://jira.atlassian.com/browse/JRACLOUD-3592

Incentivized

• Increased dev team efficiency through more streamlined development processes and task automation.
• Improved quality of software deployments due to better source control, automated testing, and release management options available in DevOps.
• Better collaboration between the dev team, business analysts, and agile project managers.

Incentivized

• Less downtime of jobs. It is each person's responsibility to check their list to see if they have any pending work.
• When people are out sick or busy, a supervisor can easily shift work from one person to another who many have time to cover work.
• Management has a quick view into seeing what is happening with a job and can use it as a tool to request addiional resources as needed.