My company is looking into purchasing some testing tools and I am looking into QACenter and Mercury as primary candidates. I have done the financials yet, but for 1-10 users, they may both be adequate. Anybody has any feeling about which is best? I do like the fact that QACenter comes with auto functional testing right off the bat without shelling out an extra 8 grand like at Mercury..
Before you and your company decide to invest in a suite of tools, I would STRONGLY suggest that you have a "requirements gathering" session (sometimes even sessions) to determine what you really need. (Be sure that all groups who will be using the tool(s) are included.) Otherwise, you run the risk of purchasing a solution that doesn't fit your needs.
I have used both Mercury and Compuware tools, and so far, I would say that they each have their own "quirks" about them.
In the end, it's really which best meets:
1.) Your requirements
2.) Your budget
I have done evaluations of both Compuware and Mercury from a web testing perspective. Before purchasing a testing suite, you need to do get a sample of the product in-house and try it out on your applications, as well as take in the suggestions from "Bug Seeker." That is what I did and I liked Mercury better. To me, it seemed to be more user-friendly than Compuware, even though it has some quirks.
I agree with Luv2Test and Bug Seeker - I have just finished an evaluation and included all of the above. Also consider your future platforms/languages, its not always easy to explain why your testing tool will not work without additional dollars spent.