OpenText Functional Testing for Developers and Qualibrate are competing in the testing processes category. Qualibrate seems to have the upper hand due to its comprehensive features that justify its higher cost, including a streamlined user experience and a faster ROI.
Features: OpenText provides strong automation capabilities, integration with development environments, and advanced script management. Qualibrate offers simplified test creation and execution, intuitive test workflow, and seamless integration with business processes.
Room for Improvement: OpenText could improve by enhancing its user interface, adding more personalized support, and expanding features to match new technologies. Qualibrate could focus on reducing initial setup costs, enhancing scalability, and offering more support for non-standard processes.
Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText ensures smooth system integration with its reliable deployment model and extensive support resources. Qualibrate stands out with an equally efficient deployment process and more personalized customer service, providing a tailored user experience.
Pricing and ROI: OpenText offers a cost-effective setup focusing on balanced ROI over time, reflecting strategic long-term value. Qualibrate, with higher initial costs, ensures a quicker ROI supported by advanced features and operational efficiency, reflecting a focus on immediate gains.
Initially, it was quite poor, but it seems they are making efforts to improve.
For technical support, I would give them an eight because whenever we have a concern, they immediately reach out to us.
We regularly update the product, and overall, it is stable.
In some cases, object recognition is not 100%, and a customized solution is necessary.
The price of OpenText UFT Developer is a bit higher than expected, but there are no better tools available for a valid comparison.
OpenText UFT Developer is user-friendly and integrates well with Visual Studio.
| Product | Market Share (%) |
|---|---|
| OpenText Functional Testing for Developers | 3.1% |
| Qualibrate | 0.8% |
| Other | 96.1% |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 2 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 12 |
| Large Enterprise | 29 |
OpenText Functional Testing for Developers offers robust automation capabilities with support for complex algorithms, multi-platform testing, and developer-friendly integration using C# and Java, facilitating seamless testing transitions and efficient automation workflows.
This testing tool is highly valued for its integration with ALM and Jenkins, along with its developer-focused environment adaptable to Eclipse and Visual Studio. With AI-based object recognition, an object repository, and test framework integration, it bolsters DevOps practices while reducing IT workloads. Supporting UFT to LeanFT transition, it caters to SAP, Java, .NET environments, and more. Enhanced with stable automation, extensive protocol support, and both on-premises and cloud deployments, it targets performance, regression, and functional testing, while recording and screengrabs enhance automation capabilities. Future improvements could include expanded browser compatibility, enhanced JavaScript and mobile support, and better object recognition.
What are the key features of OpenText Functional Testing for Developers?Organizations implement OpenText Functional Testing for complex test automation on desktop, web, and banking applications, supporting performance, regression, and functionality testing across environments like SAP, Java, and .NET. UFT aids in GUI, infrastructure, and ERP application automation, with deployment options including on-premises and cloud implementations. Enhanced screengrabs and recording features aid in practical test case development, while addressing emerging technology needs is a focus.
We monitor all Functional Testing Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
