Digital.ai Agility (formerly VersionOne) helps organizations harness the power of their people’s knowledge, processes, and technology to build agile practices that scale across the enterprise. Its capabilities enable organizations to align products and investments with strategic business goals by coordinating planning, tracking, and reporting work across large distributed companies. Digital.ai Agility connects business strategy with team execution, providing a unified view at all levels,…
N/A
Rally Software
Score 6.8 out of 10
N/A
Rally Software headquartered in Boulder, Colorado developed the Rally agile software development / ALM platform which was acquired by CA Technologies and rebranded as CA Agile Central. After CA's acquisition by Broadcom the software was once again rebranded as Rally.
Digital.ai Agility provided a better user experience with more functionality geared towards the type of processes our team was following. Trello was too basic and did not have nearly the functionality we needed. Azure DevOps had many of the same features as Digital.ai …
Vice President, Chief Architect, Development Manager and Software Engineer
Chose Digital.ai Agility
The waterfall evangelists wanted MS Project. Some Agile enthusiasts wanted Rally and some wanted VersionOne. We did an evaluation and looked at how each tool supported them. We mainly use VersionOne, but since the PM team is from a center of excellence, they still use …
These two are close; however, CollabNet VersionOne offers more flexibility and control. Admin users have a wider variety of customization options and integration with 3rd party applications
We considered rally & Agilecraft since they also provides good support to SAFe framework. Though I personally found Rally better equipped but Rally was rejected due to its higher cost.
Adobe Experience Manager Mobile High Profile Quality Engineer
Chose Digital.ai Agility
JIRA appears to be more extensible with the ability for Scrum, Kanban, bug/incident tracking, and the ability to customize dashboards. However, VersionOne's performance over the same teams is extremely fast in comparison and therefore allows users to be more productive over the …
Mingle is more easy to do business with regarding customizations. We wanted features like task lists, reporting across project boards on a company level. Mingle was able to accommodate such changes.
Basecamp functions much differently from Version One and serves a different purpose, so it's kind of like comparing apples and oranges. However, both V1 and Basecamp have their pros and cons. V1 makes it easier to manage Agile processes, but Basecamp is more user-friendly and …
I didn't select Jira myself, but Jira has drag & drop capability for attachments; a better search engine; much more customization available per team; a cleaner look and feel; great integration with Zephyr for test case management; and story items are not as bloated with fields.
Rally and Asana have comparable features and are both valuable project management tools, but Asana's user interface is well-organized and highly intuitive. It's easy to add tasks and collaborators, edit due dates, indicate progress on tasks, close out projects, etc. However, …
Overall, Rally Software is a better and more powerful tool than Jira for the same exact purposes. Jira cannot function as a requirements repository so it needs plugins or separate tools to do the same thing. There is no space or option to see all defects or user stories or …
We have used Jira in the past. Jira is easy to use and seems to be an industry standard. Rally is clunky and expensive. The dev side did not pick it, the business did due to its reporting capabilities.
I did not select Rally; it was chosen by the organization. If I were choosing what to use within my own team, I would use Trello. It's free, very simple to use, and has a much nicer user interface. My company previously used VersionOne however, and I prefer Rally over that …
It was a close race between JAMA, JIRA and Rally. We decided to go for JAMA as a requirements management tool and use Rally for Agile projects. The cost was another factor that made us select Rally.
Our evaluation was done many years ago, but at the time Rally provided the best mix of SCRUM-driven features, visibility and economy for our product engineering teams.
Selected because the others seemed worse two years ago when the decision was made. VersionOne seemed ugly and too restricted. Might look better now. Microsoft TFS, now VSO, looked limited but also might look better now. Microsoft is improving it at a remarkably rapid pace. Jira …
The process we used to select a tool was to create a scorecard of IT and Business stakeholder needs. We then reviewed seven tools and graded them against the scorecard requirements. We took the top two products and had a one day hands on demonstration with selected IT and …
We used CA Agile Central (formerly Rally) before but recently switched to Jira. I used jira before Rally too, and I think it was easier to manage defects in Jira. Also, I think Jira is better for teams and companies that want to implement agile/scrum life cycles. It's easier to …
We started exploring new tools, and found better adaptation of our team toward Jira. Jira provided engineers with simpler interfaces and more reliable service, even though less unnecessary features. Also the managers found in Jira better ability to eliminate noise and focus on …
I've also evaluated the following agile solutions: ActiveCollab, Agile Bench, Agilo for Scrum, Atlassian JIRA, Pivotal Tracker, SpringGround, Targetprocess. Telerik Teamprocess, VersionOne, ZebraPlan etc. If it’s time to transition to software that’s specific to your Agile …
Rally has much more features with regards to the the traditional Agile methodology and has more extensive tracking features for the project managers. Pivotal tracker was used for a smaller company and smaller teams but since my current company is larger in scale and has more to …
Digital.ai Agility is an ideal tool for anyone who is looking to track the work of a software development team following agile processes. It easily supports multiple teams with multiple backlogs, but also allows aggregation and rollup across those teams for larger analysis and planning.
If your organisation is planning to adopt Scaled Agile Framework Methodology (SAFe) without being worried about cost, CA Agile Central is one of the best tools. Here, you can look at various release trains and how that then flows up to the overall program budget. You can look holistically across all the release trains with minimal effort and have it flow up to the program office’s budget. It also helps by easily maintaining backlogs and integrating more seamlessly into software developers releases, iterations, and features. It has no conformance issue as it supports almost all the browsers like IE from version 8.0, Firefox from 3.6 and the newest versions of Chrome (from 6.0) and Safari (from 4.0).
structuring teams separately in a clean way. You can add as much teams as you want, and guarantee each team's work would stay separate in browsing, graphs and analytics.
detailed menus and drop-downs listing of features - technically it covers all there is of agile aspects and some more
ability to set your email notifications on/off
ability to split user stories into the next iteration if work isn't done in the previous one - no need to duplicate your user story manually
Saving of changes is inconsistent. Sometimes the changes appear to save automatically and other times the user needs to click the "Apply" button. Until the user is familiar with when this needs to happen, work can easily be lost.
This may be a setup configuration issue, but it would be good to be able to set the default team when creating stories. Too often stories are created and the user forgets to enter the team and they need to search the entire database for the story that was just created.
Assuming we were paying - right now my group gets it for free as the broader engineering organization pays for it. There would be switching costs. There would be pretty minimal data migration, but the biggest cost is getting people to learn a new tool and starting off on the right footing. Evaluation and identification of the right product is a big part of switching too
Great UI, recent refresh was terrific. Great graphs and metrics, inline editing for updates, and a multitude of views on sprint progress make for a great team collaboration experience. There is also an active community and forums so that if you do need help, it is readily available
The screens render relatively quickly but many actions that you would expect to require a single click require multiple clicks and pop-up windows. The extra windows and clicks make the product feel ponderous.
VersionOne provides outstanding training. They have Product Owner training that I recommend every Product Owner attend. They have scrum master training and other agile training that was well worth the money paid because it made the teams more productive. And the support for the tool is incredible. These people live and breathe Agile and are evangelists and enthusiasts.
I've had to use support only one time and my issue was eventually resolved but not because of my ticket--because others complained about the functionality taken away so they brought it back. My ticket was never answered or addressed. So I can't really say much for the support factor for Rally.
It more or less confirmed that we are using it the way they had in mind. We were hoping for a epiphany in terms of how we could use it better.
They also want to be a go to source for agile processes and have an online resource center. It’s not that great but had a couple of nuggets. It hasn’t really helped us too much and we are not too far off from the classical interpretation of agile.
I would recommend training, in particular for organizations that multiple on-going projects. The product seems optimized for larger, more complex teams and getting proper training on how to configure, administer and use the system would be beneficial
Implementation of RALLY services and program satisfaction among various group,... 1) Dev Outcomes: How were our resiliencies, development, learning & practitioners “make them do the work,” but that they ask you to do it “in a way like before. 2) The Ops group: Just wish to make sure any change won't break current production envirements All the stake holders has to be on the same page
We considered rally & AgileCraft since they also provides good support to SAFe framework. Though I personally found Rally better equipped but Rally was rejected due to its higher cost. AgileCraft & Version One provides many common features i.e Team Rooms, Planning Rooms, Capabilities Kanban, Road mapping but Version One support for collaboration tools & its seamless integration with GitHub played key role in going with Version One.
Rally and Asana have comparable features and are both valuable project management tools, but Asana's user interface is well-organized and highly intuitive. It's easy to add tasks and collaborators, edit due dates, indicate progress on tasks, close out projects, etc. However, Rally's interface is somewhat cluttered and difficult to navigate. My team ended up choosing Asana over Rally due to these concerns.
At first, it was difficult for the teams as we were learning Agile and VersionOne. But VersionOne provided us with great training and support. As such the teams were able to quickly adopt and embrace Agile.