projmantools

• cheap : -)
• integration with OS X:
  • iCal:
    • the best option would be two-way integration/synchronisation of iCals, such that when tasks are marked as completed in iCal (or another ical application), the project management software would pick this up and update the project status similarly
  • Spotlight: ability to search (all) the content of project files, such as dates, resources, tasks, etc.
  • Mail:
    • automatically send mails at defined events (although this could just as easily be done via the calendar application)
    • manually send mails to resources from actions, tasks, etc. with filled-in action, task etc. info
  • Address Book
    • resources should be taken from the address book, as well as e-mail addresses,
  • (even) more is better
• scheduled, revised and actual performance
• subprojects/superprojects
• import/export of MS Project + XML format; more is better
• useful defaults or good templates
• clear organisation/layout of views
• low barrier to enter (especially for newcomers)
• time and task reporting by team members
• integrated risk management
• requirements specification tied to tasks and milestones (internal or interactively from another app)
• each requirement should be expressable as a test case with acceptance limits; the test case should be exportable/integratable with a real test environment (problem: many of our tests may not be standardised or standardisable to software development tools - namely the linguistic testing)
• integration with bugtracking system

FastTrack Schedule 8 (FTS)

• Home page
• Price: XXX (already bought)
• OS X integration:
  • not too impressive. It is a cross-platform product (Win/Mac), with the constraints regarding proper integration that typically follows from that.
• scheduling:
  • standard; there's a lot of possibilities in there, and FTS has many fancy tools and dialogues to adjust existing and create new types of schedules and dependencies. This comes at the cost of an unwieldy interface, and a lot of work to get a reasonable standard setup in place (and quite ugly bars)
• subprojects:
  • FTS supports nested tasks, but has no notion of projects within projects. Also, each project is a separate file, and linking and resource sharing among projects is not possible, as far as I can tell.
• import/export:
  • can import and export to the most central formats
• defaults and templates:
  • not impressive
• visual organisation and presentation:
  • a lot of Windows in the UI, and the UI feels cluttered and overused.
• barrier to enter:
  • relatively high, based on some tests
• reporting
• risk management:
  • nothing (the word risk isn't found in the index of the user manual, and not by grepping for the same string in the user documentation either)
• requirements specification:
  • has no built-in provision for it
• requirements tied to testing:
  • has no built-in provision for it
• other pluses:
  • seems fast
• other minuses:
• conclusion:
  • Although we have paid for it already, recent development within the Mac community makes FTS look less and less attractive. 2 years ago there were no real competitors to FTS, but today the situation is almost radically different. This is also the reason for the new look into this software category before we start project management for real.

Merlin 1.3.6

• Home page
• Price: 145,- EUR
• OS X integration:
  • Mail
  • AddressBook
  • SpotLight
  • iCal
  • iChat?
• scheduling:
  • standard
• subprojects:
  • at least multiple projects are supported
  • also subtasks are supported, in practice creating the project hierarchy we need
  • no support for cross-linking between projects, but see below
  • no support for resource sharing among projects, but see below
• import/export:
  • the native file format is XML (not a good one: Apple's property list format)
  • can export to some basic formats
  • can import a couple more
• defaults and templates:
  • templates: ok
  • defaults: quite good
• visual organisation and presentation:
  • clear OS X style
• barrier to enter:
  • good integration with OS X, reuse of resources and standard GUI
  • Still a lot to learn
• reporting hours and tasks
  • this software is not multiuser or server-client-based, and thus requires all users to have one licensed copy if they want to edit the files, e.g. for entering task status, or to physically access one shared computer (but see below)
• risk management:
  • one of the advertised strengths of the application
• requirements specification:
  • not really integrated, but can be specified through so-called elements
• requirements tied to testing:
  • it is possible to export an item list Element to XML, which can then be converted to some test file. The potential is there, but it is very cumbersome.
• other pluses:
  • speedy
• other minuses:
• conclusion:
  • So far the best application tested, despite the drawbacks. I've received feedback that most of our concerns will be targeted by the next major release early next year.

SharedPlan

• Home page
• Price: 145,- EUR
• OS X integration:
• scheduling:
• subprojects: ???
• import/export:
• defaults and templates:
• visual organisation and presentation:
• barrier to enter:
• reporting
• risk management:
• requirements specification:
• requirements tied to testing:
• other pluses:
  • they have a nice set of links on their home page
• other minuses:
• conclusion:
  • won't buy because its cross-platform basis does not make use of the strengths of each platform

PMX 2.28

• Home page
• Price: $ 59.95
• OS X integration:
  • no Address Book integration
  • no other integration found either
• scheduling:
• super/subprojects:
  • each project is an island of itself
• import/export:
• defaults and templates:
• visual organisation and presentation:
• barrier to enter:
• reporting
• risk management:
• requirements specification:
  • Nothing found
• requirements tied to testing:
  • Nothing
• other pluses:
• other minuses:
  • Too restricted management tools
• conclusion:
  • NO

iTaskX 2.1

• Home page
• Price: 65,- EUR excl. VAT, 72,- incl. VAT within EU (EEC?)
• OS X integration:
  • Spotlight searching
  • iCal calendar format
  • Import of Resources from Address book, Directory server and Public Folders of a Microsoft Exchange Server
• scheduling:
  • Scheduled, base and actual task dates for effective tracking
• subprojects:
  • no support
  • different projects are different files in different windows, with no interaction between them, not even visual.
• import/export:
  • Microsoft Project XML format.
  • Microsoft Project MPX format.
  • Tab separated values.
  • CSV (Comma-Separated-Values).
  • OPML format
• defaults and templates:
• visual organisation and presentation:
• barrier to enter:
• reporting
• risk management:
• requirements specification:
• requirements tied to testing:
• other pluses:
• other minuses:
• conclusion:
  • NO, because of the multi-project issue mentioned above.

xTime Project

• Home page
• Price: $ 129.00
• OS X integration:
• scheduling:
• subprojects:
• import/export:
• defaults and templates:
• visual organisation and presentation:
• barrier to enter:
• reporting
• risk management:
• requirements specification:
  • Nothing
• requirements tied to testing:
• other pluses:
• other minuses:
  • No difference between planned duration and actual time spent on a task
  • Inflexible task setup
• conclusion:
  • NO

LeadingProject 1.3.6

• Home page
• Price: $ 199.00
• OS X integration:
• scheduling:
• subprojects:
  • supports multiple projects within one view and one resource pool
  • interdependent management of multiple projects
  • subprojects
• import/export:
  • can use ConceptDraw MINDMAP as a starting point for a project
  • can export graphs to ConceptDraw XML
• defaults and templates:
• visual organisation and presentation:
  • quite Windows-like, not very clear
• barrier to enter:
• reporting
• risk management:
  • not mentioned on the website, would need to be installed to be evaluated (there's a free trial download at their site)
• requirements specification:
  • not mentioned on the website
• requirements tied to testing:
  • not mentioned on the website
• other pluses:
• other minuses:
• conclusion:
  • NOT very likely our choice - same cross-platform issues as with others

PowerCard

• Home page
• Price: $ 59.95
• OS X integration:
  • Mail (create new e-mail from task card)
  • iChat (start new chat from task card)
  • Bonjour project sharing & editing (á la SEE)
  • Address Book (sort of)
• scheduling:
• subprojects:
• import/export:
• defaults and templates:
• visual organisation and presentation:
• barrier to enter:
• reporting
• risk management:
• requirements specification:
• requirements tied to testing:
• other pluses:
• other minuses:
  • misses and glitches all over the place - this is an unmature product even though the basic idea is good
• conclusion:
  • Not worth further considering

Intellisys Project Desktop 2.80

• Home page
• Price: $ 159.00 (Desktop version; Enterprise version only has a form to fill in to request a price quote)
• OS X integration:
  • can export iCal calendars
• scheduling:
• subprojects:
  • excellent - all projects are subprojects of one superproject, and may contain an infinite(?) number of subprojects themselves
• import/export:
• defaults and templates:
  • nothing
• visual organisation and presentation:
  • ok, but requires some getting used to
• barrier to enter:
  • not the worst, but is counterintuitive at several places
  • claims to be low
• reporting
• risk management:
  • nothing found
• requirements specification:
• requirements tied to testing:
• other pluses:
  • flexible assignment of resources
• other minuses:
  • non-intuitive interaction in many places
• conclusion:
  • NO, same cross-platform issues as with others

Apache Maven

• Home page
• Price: Free
• OS X integration:
• scheduling:
• subprojects: ???
• import/export:
• defaults and templates:
• visual organisation and presentation:
• barrier to enter:
• reporting
• risk management:
• requirements specification:
• requirements tied to testing:
• other pluses:
• other minuses:
  • seems to be mainly targeted at Java-based development, and with
• conclusion:
  • NO. Project is dead.