GitHub vs. IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
GitHub
Score 9.0 out of 10
N/A
GitHub is a platform that hosts public and private code and provides software development and collaboration tools. Features include version control, issue tracking, code review, team management, syntax highlighting, etc. Personal plans ($0-50), Organizational plans ($0-200), and Enterprise plans are available.
$40
per year per user
IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Score 7.0 out of 10
N/A
IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management (ELM) is an end-to-end engineering solution used to manage system requirements to design, workflow, and test management, extending the functionality of ALM tools for better complex-systems development.N/A
Pricing
GitHubIBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Editions & Modules
Team
$40
per year per user
Enterprise
$210
per year per user
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
GitHubIBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
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
GitHubIBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Considered Both Products
GitHub
Chose GitHub
GitHub comes handy in terms of usage and capabilities, it is easy to use and quite a user friendly tools when it comes to user experience, with limited UI/UX and it has vast exposure when it comes to third party integration and being quite mature and yet evolving and popular …
Chose GitHub
Over my career I've used a variety of other platforms but always find myself coming back to GitHub which has always had the most forward thinking features, evolving faster than other platforms, staying on the cutting edge of AI and other tools as they are released. AI …
Chose GitHub
GitLab has strong code review and project management capabilities, but it has a smaller community. Better for cross-functional collaboration but less intuitive for nontechnical users.
Chose GitHub
GitHub has best in class UI, massive open source base. GitHub actions are very flexible and pricing is very competitive.
Chose GitHub
Bitbucket in most cases is very similar. Though the UI and collaboration tools are much easier to use overall on GitHub.
Chose GitHub
GitHub compared to Gitlab and Bitbucket seems to have an easier and nice to use interface. This is mainly due to the fact that GitHub is the No1 choice for most of the Open Source projects. Developers out there are already famaliar to it's UX/UI and use it every day.

Another …
Chose GitHub
GitHub is primarily targeted at developers and open-source communities, while Bitbucket is geared more towards small- to medium-sized businesses. GitHub has a free plan for open-source projects, while Bitbucket charges a fee for private repositories. For organizations with …
Chose GitHub
Github has much better code view/search/edit power versus bitbucket, and is the industry standard for professional software developers.
Chose GitHub
GitHub is the best platform to manage your source code. You can manage your CI/CD with different cloud service provider platforms and different languages. You can also create GHE for a number of organizations and repositories. Learning GitHub is easy and simple and supports …
Chose GitHub
GitHub stacks up against all of its competitors due to its ease of use and great UI that tops the all. I selected GitHub considering its popularity greater developer community. GitHub also provides Student Developer Pack that we can use to enhance our knowledge and get up to …
Chose GitHub
While SVN comes with basic functionalities, TFS is a superior tool and often unused to its potential in most cases. GitHub brings that equilibrium. It perfectly works like a versioning tool and can also be used to create CICD deployment pipelines.
Chose GitHub
GitHub is distributed model while perforce is more centralised .i.e. Developers can easily download full change history.
Git is better in terms of performance as it provides faster result.
Also Git is open source and available free of cost. Git is also storage effective with …
Chose GitHub
One biggest reason is that GitHub is popular and used by many so it is easy to get contributions this also means that most people are already familiar with using GitHub. Gitlab does offer more features and has more rich pipelines with the free repository as well but GitHub is …
Chose GitHub
GitHub is awesome at it's own place. I'm using it from last 3 years and not used so Gitlab or Bitbucket so much. They are also having almost same features but i think one of then is free for multiple branches.
Chose GitHub
GitHub gives support for open-source applications. I think it has an easier and more reliable interface compared to other products on the market. You are able to expose your work via GitHub so that it can be used as a proof of your work to your current employer or future …
Chose GitHub
It was the broader set of features and how easy it is to browse the history that made us change to GitHub, and time has proven us right.
Chose GitHub
GitHub is the de-facto solution for version control and code storage. Our team prefers it over other options like BitBucket for its feature-completeness.
Chose GitHub
GitHub is at least as good as BitBucket, if not a little more refined. GitHub is hands-down better than TFS. If you are using TFS, you really need to move to a modern source control system. The newer Azure DevOps Server has a decent Git offering, but the UX is incredibly …
Chose GitHub
BitBucket is a very similar tool, but you can have multiple private repositories and it's easy to integrate it with JIRA.
Chose GitHub
In the past, we used Beanstalk and were happy with it. Going forward, GitHub makes it easier for us to work with open-source projects and with new temporary developers who might not be familiar with Beanstalk.
Chose GitHub
GitLab is my personal preference for source control, primarily because of the fact that it is open-source, and that it has great CI tools integrated directly into the service. However, GitHub is probably the leader with respect to enterprise offerings. GitHub has many more …
IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
The established experience contained in most IBM Rational DOORS installations is only compensated by the high flexibility of Atlassian Jira. The markets state that Jira is less expensive in the setup. There are many manufacturers that support IBM Rational DOORS to have the big …
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
I would choose IBM Rational DOORS over any other requirements management tool out there. Polarion tries to do too many things and is great for some things but as far as requirements management IBM Rational DOORS is the best tool on the market.
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
It was easier to do all the change management-related activities, even configurations were handled very effectively. New process definitions and initiatives made it easier for better project deliverables. Effective resource allocations and better reporting and defect …
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
DOORS is not a suite nor an integrated tool like HP ALM or Rally. It only does one thing and cannot hold defects or accommodate sprint planning. It is older, takes longer to connect and load, and has an inconvenient timeout. It does do a basic job and can be customized to show …
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
DOORS is the legacy and leading tool for requirements management. It is widely used by the Aerospace industry.
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Although Jira is getting popular in DevOps team, it does not work well with ITIL model as RTC does. RTC is still widely used for production management in our company.

CA Service Desk Manager (GSD) is integrated with TPAM which is being used for privilege account management in …
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
To me, DOORS is like a super version of Excel and Word combined with a relational database. I have not used too many database softwares before, but DOORS does a very specific job well enough. It is so powerful that some of the tools just go unused. Some parts of the software …
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Requisite Pro (and Rational Requirements Composer, it's successor) is more simple and focused on requirements. Is like a part of DOORS and can be suitable to smaller projects. IT people on the other hand prefer agile tools like Jira. Of course if the project is big enough, …
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
My organization was already using it when I joined the team.
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
It's well integrated with IBM products so it provides better coverage across the lifecycle with first class integration. Other producst are stand alone with limited integration with ALM tools.
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
I found [them] to be more flexible and with the possibility to create [an HTML format].
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
An alternative which I have very briefly used is Atlassian's JIRA, which is very similar to IBM RTC, although has a modern UI, feels light-weight and is faster to respond and additionally has seamless integration with bitbucket, which is a Git platform, and other Atlassian …
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
JIRA is simpler and much more intuitive, especially when bundled with confluence. TFS is obvious choice if working with Microsoft technologies and has superb API.
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
I have worked on different agile project management tool like JIRA, Teamfoge and RTC. RTC is simple and has a nice UI.
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
It is easy for the organization to identify what kind of problems there are in the project and how many change requests have been resolved and how many are pending. Thereby the employer can pro-actively arrange the meetings and address the issues to the team members.
Chose IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
This product had many of the same features, was easier to use, which would result in less training, and had a lower price tag. Logic and reason do not always figure prominently in a decision. Sometimes there are intangible characteristics that alter the flow. In my observation, …
Features
GitHubIBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Version Control Software Features
Comparison of Version Control Software Features features of Product A and Product B
GitHub
7.9
Ratings
4% below category average
IBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
-
Ratings
Branching and Merging9.70 Ratings00 Ratings
Version History8.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Version Control Collaboration Tools7.10 Ratings00 Ratings
Pull Requests9.60 Ratings00 Ratings
Code Review Tools7.70 Ratings00 Ratings
Project Access Control8.10 Ratings00 Ratings
Automated Testing Integration7.30 Ratings00 Ratings
Issue Tracking Integration4.10 Ratings00 Ratings
Branch Protection9.30 Ratings00 Ratings
Best Alternatives
GitHubIBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Small Businesses
Git
Git
Score 10.0 out of 10
Polarion ALM
Polarion ALM
Score 9.8 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
Git
Git
Score 10.0 out of 10
Polarion ALM
Polarion ALM
Score 9.8 out of 10
Enterprises
Perforce P4
Perforce P4
Score 7.7 out of 10
Polarion ALM
Polarion ALM
Score 9.8 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
GitHubIBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Likelihood to Recommend
8.8
(0 ratings)
8.8
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
10.0
(0 ratings)
8.0
(0 ratings)
Usability
10.0
(0 ratings)
2.1
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
8.8
(0 ratings)
5.0
(0 ratings)
Implementation Rating
-
(0 ratings)
10.0
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
GitHubIBM Engineering Lifecycle Management
Likelihood to Recommend
I’ve worked with Github my entire career and view it as an essential part. As a Product manager it allows me to keep track of my features, epics, issues and QA. It is easy to set up and integrate with tools such as intercom or notion.
Read full review
While working on a complex project it is important all the needed change requests are handled in an effective manner, this tool helps us do exactly the same, it had great features to manage those change management tickets, making sure to merge the change with existing workflow, prioritize the requests centrally so there are no duplicates. Easy to collaborate across different teams and colleagues across the aisle.
Read full review
Pros
  • Version control: GitHub provides a powerful and flexible Git-based version control system that allows teams to track changes to their code over time, collaborate on code with others, and maintain a history of their work.
  • Code review: GitHub's pull request system enables teams to review code changes, discuss suggestions and merge changes in a central location. This makes it easier to catch bugs and ensure that code quality remains high.
  • Collaboration: GitHub provides a variety of collaboration tools to help teams work together effectively, including issue tracking, project management, and wikis.
Read full review
  • There are a couple of areas where IBM Rational DOORS is quite strong. First, it is part of the IBM CLM solution so the artifacts developed in this module can be easily available for other functions like development and QA. They can link with their stories and test cases and team leads and managers can use traceability matrix to find out where there are gaps in coverage.
  • Comprehensive configuration management functionality (concept of multiple streams and global configuration) is available, which can be helpful if you need to implement configuration management scenarios for your product or project. For example, a certain version of a requirement can be linked with one story and another version of same requirement can be linked with another story. This is the unique feature which other current tools in the market don't provide.
  • It's highly customizable so you can configure the project areas based on your need. You can have your own requirement types, and you can define templates to speed up the process. Comprehensive review functionality is there as well.
Read full review
Cons
  • Not an easy tool for beginners. Prior command-line experience is expected to get started with GitHub efficiently.
  • Unlike other source control platforms GitHub is a little confusing. With no proper GUI tool its hard to understand the source code version/history.
  • Working with larger files can be tricky. For file sizes above 100MB, GitHub expects the developer to use different commands (lfs).
  • While using the web version of GitHub, it has some restrictions on the number of files that can be uploaded at once. Recommended action is to use the command-line utility to add and push files into the repository.
Read full review
  • Too complex for projects or businesses that don't really need the detail. It is basically overkill.
  • If you are new to IBM Rational tools, it may be a medium learning curve. You'd also need lots of training from your people, since, as usual, this tool shouldn't be managed alone.
  • It may seem old fashion compared to Jira and the current control tools used in IT industry.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
GitHub's ease of use and continued investment into the Developer Experience have made it the de facto tool for our engineers to manage software changes. With new features that continue to come out, we have been able to consolidate several other SaaS solutions and reduce the number of tools required for each engineer to perform their job responsibilities.
Read full review
One of the downsides for us was the capabilities of the native build tools were lacking. The project management and work item tracking capabilities are great and I would recommend the tool to anyone. There is a definite learning curve with RTC as a source control system, and the streams are a concept unique to the product
Read full review
Usability
GitHub is a clean and modern interface. The underlying integrations make it smooth to couple tasks, projects, pull requests and other business functions together. The insights and reporting is really strong and is getting better with every release. GitHub's PR tooling is strong for being web based, i do believe a better code editor would rival having to pull merge conflicts into local IDE.
Read full review
The UI is terrible and not intuitive. Users need training in order to complete tasks. Much like SAP, it's not the clearest tool. The tracing feature is especially complicated because you must write the scripts yourself. There is a learning curve. Also, even the setup, installation, and logging in each time takes a considerable amount of time.
Read full review
Support Rating
It's a testament to how easy it is to use GitHub and how many others use it that you can pretty much find the answer to any problem you have by searching online. Consequently, I've never needed to use their support. It's an incredibly easy tool to set up initially, so it won't require much onboarding expertise to get started.
Read full review
It does a basic job and has the potential to complete some robust reporting tasks, however, it really is a clunky piece of software with a terrible user interface that makes using it routinely quite unpleasant. Many of our legacy and maintenance projects still use DOORS but our department and company use many alternatives and are looking for better tools.
Read full review
Implementation Rating
No answers on this topic
No problems
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
GitHub comes handy in terms of usage and capabilities, it is easy to use and quite a user friendly tools when it comes to user experience, with limited UI/UX and it has vast exposure when it comes to third party integration and being quite mature and yet evolving and popular tool many other platform provide easy integration with the platform and make first choice for many tools architects.
Read full review
The established experience contained in most IBM Rational DOORS installations is only compensated by the high flexibility of Atlassian JIRA. The markets state that Jira is less expensive in the setup. There are many manufacturers that support IBM Rational DOORS to have the big tiers as their customers. Jira has problems in that growth. Jira has more features compared to IBM Rational DOORS. For example in cloud support, IBM Rational DOORS relies on improved external services while Jira abstracts in the most modern way. Jira experts have a different professional background compared to that of IBM Rational DOORS. They are indeed from different engineering generations. There is little interchange in personal and ideas.
Read full review
Return on Investment
  • GitHub has made branching much easier for our dev team. Easy branching makes it easier for us to gain all the benefits of source control while giving us the flexibility to decide what features/branches we want to go in any particular release.
  • Integration with third-party tools like Azure DevOps has allowed us to streamline workflows and gain the benefits of automated testing whenever a commit is made.
  • GitHub has also raised visibility with its integration with our Sprint boards. We can easily jump to a commit from a work item.
Read full review
  • RTC helps automate incident management workflow which improves our work efficiency. With the integration with Geneos and GSD, we can one click create RTC incident tickets from Geneos with most of the information copied from Geneos automatically and then link the details to GSD for privilege account management if needed.
  • RTC provides a holistic view on ad hoc production activities. We use RTC for production management. Whoever needs to get access to production due to non-planned activities (planned change is managed in GSD) has to raise an incident ticket or service request ticket in RTC so as to get production privilege accounts.
  • RTC is also being used to review and approve the usage of privilege account which help us to meet audit requirements. For example, if a user made some database change using privilege account under incident number xxx, an entry will be added in RTC and sent to account owner or production support manager to review and approve.
Read full review
ScreenShots