RE: [Sigia-l] CASE Tools (was Word HTML - money were my mouth is (was When Should a Manual be Web-based?))

• Next message: Simon Wistow: "Re: [Sigia-l] "Study: Content Management Tools Fail""
• Previous message: Chris Chandler: "[Sigia-l] CASE Tools (was Word HTML - money were my mouth is (was When Should a Manual be Web-based?))"
• In reply to: Chris Chandler: "[Sigia-l] CASE Tools (was Word HTML - money were my mouth is (was When Should a Manual be Web-based?))"
• Next in thread: John O'Donovan-INTERNET: "RE: [Sigia-l] CASE Tools (was Word HTML - money were my mouth is (was When Should a Manual be Web-based?))"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

"Chris Chandler" wrote:

>I'd be very interested to hear what CASE tool you use and recommend,
and >from any other IA's out there using CASE tools
>to create/manage requirements.

While doing market research for our tool/company, I came across a report
from IDC published on Rational's website that discusses the current
state and direction of tools/companies in the Analysis, Modeling, and
Design Tools market (which includes tools for generating requirements
and specifications):

http://www.rational.com/products/rose/idc_main.jsp

The companies leading in the market as far as revenues go are Rational
(Rose), Oracle (Designer), Computer Associates (ERWin), TogetherSoft
(ControlCenter), and TeleLogic AB (Tau).

In general, the biggest barriers for these solutions are the time, cost,
and changes in methodology associated with adopting them.

As for requirements management tools, Telelogic has an article that
states that the Standish Group declared Telelogic DOORS the market
leader.

http://www.telelogic.com/campaigns/2003/americas/standish_report/index.c
fm?source=standish1

Rational RequisitePro is a close runner up. Followed by Integrated
Chipware's RTM and Starbase CaliberRM.

The report says the biggest barrier for these tools is that most people
just don't think they need an RM tool unless they are working on a very
complex project.

The reports go into much more detail on the strengths and weaknesses of
these tools.

Of course, I'm hoping Axure makes it onto those reports someday soon!

Hope that helps,
        Victor

Victor Hsu
Axure Software Solutions, Inc.
victor_at_axure.com
www.axure.com

------------
When replying, please *trim your post* as much as possible.
*Plain text, please; NO Attachments

ASIST IA 03 Summit: Making Connections
http://www.asist-events.org/IASummit2003/

Searchable list archive: http://www.info-arch.org/lists/sigia-l/
________________________________________
Sigia-l mailing list -- post to: Sigia-l_at_asis.org
Changes to subscription: http://mail.asis.org/mailman/listinfo/sigia-l

• Next message: Simon Wistow: "Re: [Sigia-l] "Study: Content Management Tools Fail""
• Previous message: Chris Chandler: "[Sigia-l] CASE Tools (was Word HTML - money were my mouth is (was When Should a Manual be Web-based?))"
• In reply to: Chris Chandler: "[Sigia-l] CASE Tools (was Word HTML - money were my mouth is (was When Should a Manual be Web-based?))"
• Next in thread: John O'Donovan-INTERNET: "RE: [Sigia-l] CASE Tools (was Word HTML - money were my mouth is (was When Should a Manual be Web-based?))"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Sun Nov 23 2003 - 22:55:39 EST