Telerik Test Studio Reviews

Our company uses the solution for performance and automation testing. 

The solution is very helpful for media and visual studio. We have a legacy application related to healthcare products in the hospital management industry. We create a lot of smart objects using Microsoft Objects. For usability, we want user testing to be done in such a way that doesn't require much scripting. 

Due to stringent timelines, the solution helps us to validate the load of the applications. The team of object identifications is specifically in regard to Microsoft Conference. We have used, analyzed, and streamlined the tool based on the level of compatibility. We have confidence when using Microsoft Edge browsers that script can be created. From a performance standpoint, the load testing determines the amount of time a load should take. 

We also perform recreation testing to locate different types of input data that are required for automation. 

We currently have 20 to 30 users and plan to increase usage in the future. 

The performance and load testing are very good. 

There are some compatibility issues with the load standpoint test. When we use the solution instead of Microsoft Edge, more scripting is required. 

The reports for structure point or test management could be more compatible with other tools. For example, when I create an application I sometimes cannot generate a report. 

I have been using the solution for three years. 

The solution is stable but could be better. 

The solution is scalable so I rate scalability an eight out of ten. 

Technical support is good so I rate support a nine out of ten. 

Positive

The setup is straightforward. I am familiar and comfortable with the setup so I don't find it challenging. 

We implemented the solution in-house. 

The pricing is fair so I rate it an eight out of ten. 

The only small disadvantage with the solution is that you need to develop technical skills to perform tests or else they might seem complicated. 

Some users feel Microsoft is better because they are familiar with it. We sometimes need to explain to clients that they have used these skills before so there is compatibility or tech transfer with the solution. The solution is a good product but some users are more confident using Microsoft. 

The solution seems more complicated with regard to the regulation and loading points of view. For these reasons, Microsoft is probably a better product as an end-to-end solution for many users. 

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

We used Telerik Test Studio to automate UI test cases.

The way it identifies elements is good. 

Its UI is not very user-friendly and could be improved. For new users, it isn't easy. In addition, sometimes, tests used to fail intermittently. These were the two disadvantages.

I used Telerik Test Studio for almost two years in my previous organization. Currently, I work in a different organization, and the tools that I am using here are different. I last used it six months ago.

Telerik Test Studio supports multiple platforms such as Web applications, Desktop, and Silverlight. I used it in the Silverlight application, and I felt that it wasn't stable enough. A few tests would fail intermittently. It wasn't stable. I'd rate it an eight out of ten.

I'd rate it a six out of ten in terms of scalability. It needed some effort to increase scalability.

SmartBear TestComplete is much faster than Telerik Test Studio. Like Telerik Test Studio, SmartBear TestComplete also supports multiple platforms. I find SmartBear TestComplete better than Telerik Test Studio in terms of the UI and other things.

It was already there when I joined the organization. They had been using it almost since 2012. So, when I joined the organization, everything was well documented. I just went through the documents.

Its installation was easy. It was a normal installation. It took about 10 to 15 minutes. I'd rate it a nine out of ten in terms of the ease of the setup and available documentation.

Instead of Telerik Test Studio, I'd recommend writing test cases in .Net so that in the future, if you move away from Telerik Test Studio to another tool, it would be easier for you. Your current code would be reusable. You won't have to change your test cases much.

We wrote our code in a separate IDE, which was Visual Studio, and internally, we had the infrastructure to interact with Telerik Test Studio. All the internal logic that we needed for our purpose was implemented in .NET, and we used Telerik Test Studio for tests.

I'd rate Telerik Test Studio an eight out of ten.

We used Telerik Test Studio primarily for UI automation. We also used it for API calls.

The application we've been working on was more for payroll and HR applications, so we had a lot of tests that needed to be run nightly. Telerik Test Studio was efficient in automating those tests, continuously reinstalling them on nightly builds, then checking the results the next day.

We mainly used Telerik Test Studio for the UI, PDF validations, and Excel comparisons.

Before using Telerik Test Studio, I was a manual tester, so it was my first automation tool, yet I felt very comfortable using it. I've used the record and play feature, and Telerik Test Studio was easy to use. The tool was easy to understand, even for a first-time user like me.

I also found the tool valuable in getting and fetching the elements, creating libraries, and parameterizing with various data.

Another valuable feature of Telerik Test Studio is PDF validation, which gave my company an advantage in the project because of the many reports for testing, for example, pay slips and other financial documents. The PDF validation feature of Telerik Test Studio made my job easier.

With my limited knowledge of Telerik Test Studio, I observed that the Excel and Word validation was quite challenging, which is an area for improvement in the tool. My team had to use a lot of code to get Telerik Test Studio to read the data and get results. A beginner would need to ask for help from developers to become more confident with Excel validation.

I also experienced minor difficulties with Telerik Test Studio, particularly in fetching elements in some scenarios when using C# for coding.

What I want to be added in the next release of Telerik Test Studio is end-to-end testing, where you can integrate the tool with a database. I'm not sure if that exists, but I want more of it if it does. I also want more document validations on Telerik Test Studio that require minimal coding.

The last time I used Telerik Test Studio was six months ago, in my previous company. My experience with the tool is one and a half years.

Telerik Test Studio had stability issues. Sometimes, it gets stuck and takes time to get sorted.

Once, some of the test cases failed. Sometimes, you'll notice false failures from Telerik Test Studio. Issues could arise from script scheduling. My team also found figuring out issues very challenging in the tool. You have to observe for a few days before calling Telerik support, and support will identify the problem.

I'd rate the scalability of Telerik Test Studio as seven out of ten.

I contacted Telerik Test Studio technical support many times. Whenever there's an issue, I email support, and the support team will devise solutions for me to try. If that doesn't work, Telerik support will hop on a call with me, and I'll show what's happening and what I did, and whoever's assisting me will recommend some solutions to the issues.

I found the Telerik Test Studio support excellent and always prompt, so I'd rate support as nine out of ten.

Positive

I joined the company when Telerik Test Studio was already in use, but I did ask why the company chose the tool. The company lacked better QA or someone with a good knowledge of automation, so it would be easier if people who joined the company could use a solution with a record-and-play feature, and that's where Telerik Test Studio came in.

Based on the reviews, Telerik Test Studio also offered good support, so my company went with the tool.

The initial setup for Telerik Test Studio was easy, and even updating the versions was easy.

I didn't work with the framework from scratch because I joined the company with the framework already set up. I used the existing framework, but doing minor tweaks was easy.

I didn't find the initial setup for the tool difficult, even when I didn't have an earlier experience with automation tools.

The time it takes to deploy Telerik Test Studio would depend on the updates, but on average, the deployment process only took about thirty minutes.

I don't remember the cost of Telerik Test Studio, but I do remember that my company had two or three licenses at the time.

I used Telerik Test Studio with another person in my previous company, so two people used the tool at the time.

Telerik Test Studio did help me a lot to understand automation and to get a sense of automation. In my company, I started working on Katalon, which I felt had a similar approach to Telerik Test Studio. I think having worked with Telerik Test Studio was advantageous, so I would recommend it to beginners. It may not be as beneficial to well-experienced users, but Telerik Test Studio has many advantages for beginners like me.

I'd ask first-time users of the tool if they've used other automation tools. If you used Selenium or another tool, it would be easy for you to use Telerik Test Studio, especially as it's a record-and-play solution. This is a perfect tool for a beginner who aims to start with automation. This is an ideal tool; you can even level up after learning more about Telerik Test Studio.

I'm rating the tool as eight out of ten because it did help a lot in progressing my career and getting the essence of automation. I also learned API testing from Telerik Test Studio, and I'm currently doing a lot of API testing with Postman, a solution similar to Telerik Test Studio. Everything is accessible on the tool, including UI, elements, and detection. It doesn't require a very high level of coding, so Telerik Test Studio makes life easier, at least from my perspective.

My previous company was a Telerik customer.

This solution primarily automates the software cases related to UI or our functional test cases. We deploy this solution on-premises. The product needs a feature that allows users to create another site on a VPN. 

The object repository is the most valuable feature. Different elements can be identified and reutilized through the repository across other scripts. Additionally, the product has a very smooth process for launching and closing the application after execution. 

The product could be improved by implementing a feature that allows users to select multiple different file types simultaneously. For example, it could provide the user with the ability to choose a Word Doc, PDF and Excel file at the same time.

We have been using this solution for approximately one year as customers. We are using the most recent version 2022.1.412.0.

The product is stable.

The product is scalable, and five people are currently using it on my team. However, I cannot comment on the number of people using it for other projects and in other departments across the company.

We have had a good experience with customer service and support. Their response is smooth, prompt and precise. In addition, they have the option of resolving your issue over a call, if necessary, and they are available throughout working hours.

The initial setup was very easy. It took approximately seven to ten minutes to set up.

We have not seen a return on investment yet.

Compared to other products, the pricing for this product is slightly on the higher side. We believe the pricing could be reduced. Regarding licensing costs, it is approximately 1,500 for one license.

I rate this product a seven out of ten. The product is good but it can be improved by including a feature that allows multiple file types to be selected simultaneously.

The most valuable aspects of the solution are the font, size, and interface.

The customization could be improved. The first time I customized the solution, it was quite challenging.

The charts need to be more detailed and customizable.

I've been using the solution for three years.

The solution is stable.

It's quite easy to scale the solution. Currently, we only have three users on it.

I've never had contact with technical support.

The initial setup was straightforward.

We use the on-premises deployment model.

I'd recommend the solution. I'd rate it eight out of ten.