Dec 01, 2021
UFT One is the one you need.
OpenText Functional Testing and OpenText Functional Testing for Developers are top contenders in the functional testing category. Based on user feedback, OpenText Functional Testing holds an edge due to its comprehensive technology support and advanced automation capabilities, while OpenText Functional Testing for Developers offers robust integration with developer tools, making it a favourite among development teams.
Features: OpenText Functional Testing is known for efficient object identification, advanced automation capabilities, and AI-driven features. Its integration with a wide range of technologies and comprehensive DevOps compatibility make it a versatile tool. OpenText Functional Testing for Developers is popular for its developer-friendly environment, integration with mainstream programming languages like C# and Java, and efficient integration with various developer tools.
Room for Improvement: OpenText Functional Testing could benefit from enhanced browser support and better integration with modern scripting languages. Complex script maintenance and high resource consumption are also areas needing attention. OpenText Functional Testing for Developers could improve by expanding support for more platforms and languages and lowering its licensing costs. Simplifying the user interface further would make it more accessible to non-technical users.
Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Both products mainly see on-premise deployments. For OpenText Functional Testing, customer service is generally responsive, though occasionally slow depending on the issue's complexity and contract levels. Users of OpenText Functional Testing for Developers echo similar experiences, stating that timely responses to complex issues remain a challenge.
Pricing and ROI: OpenText Functional Testing's pricing is deemed high but seen as justified due to its extensive features and technology support. Comparatively, OpenText Functional Testing for Developers has more flexible options for cloud and on-premises deployment, although it can be costly without a free trial. Despite this, both tools are recognized for their potential to deliver significant ROI when implemented effectively.
The development time using UFT can be cut down into half as compared to coding from scratch.
Automation is done very fast, leading to improvements in the QA process and reducing the time needed for test automation.
We can easily achieve a return on investment in one, two, or three years.
Organizations can't wait for this lengthy process, especially when they are under pressure with their timelines.
Support cases are easily created and attended to promptly, depending on urgency.
The technical support is rated eight out of ten.
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.
Running them in parallel allows you to consume multiple runtime licenses and just execute the tests that don't have conflicting priorities and get through a lot of volume much quicker.
The tool can be installed on all computers used by developers or test automation engineers.
One of the key stability issues was that Windows would consume memory without releasing it, leading to regression testing crashes.
We regularly update the product, and overall, it is stable.
Incorporating behavior-driven development tests would enhance the capabilities of UFT One.
We frequently encountered stability issues when the browser dependency caused Windows to consume memory without releasing it, leading to crashes during regression testing.
If it could move closer to a no-code or low-code solution, it might dominate the market again.
In some cases, object recognition is not 100%, and a customized solution is necessary.
There are many open-source tools with no cost, and there are no-code tools that are less expensive than UFT.
The pricing or licensing policy of OpenText is a bit expensive, however, it's one of the best solutions in the market.
It's cheaper than Tricentis Tosca but more expensive than some others.
The price of OpenText UFT Developer is a bit higher than expected, but there are no better tools available for a valid comparison.
UFT supports Oracle, SAP, PeopleSoft, and other non-web applications, making automation feasible.
OpenText Functional Testing has an impressive ability to connect to mobile devices and its ability to test so many different types of software, whether it be mainframe, APIs, mobile, web, or desktop.
The best features of OpenText Functional Testing include descriptive programming, the ability to add objects in the repository, and its ease of use for UI compared to other tools.
OpenText UFT Developer is user-friendly and integrates well with Visual Studio.
| Product | Mindshare (%) |
|---|---|
| OpenText Functional Testing | 7.1% |
| OpenText Functional Testing for Developers | 3.3% |
| Other | 89.6% |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 20 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 13 |
| Large Enterprise | 74 |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 2 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 12 |
| Large Enterprise | 30 |
OpenText Functional Testing provides automated testing with compatibility across technologies, browsers, and platforms. It targets APIs, GUIs, and applications like SAP and Oracle for efficient test automation, emphasizing usability and integration with tools such as Jenkins and ALM.
OpenText Functional Testing offers wide-ranging automation capabilities for functional and regression testing, API testing, and automation across web, desktop, and mainframe applications. It supports script recording and object identification, appealing to less technical users. Despite its advantages, it grapples with memory issues, stability concerns, and a challenging scripting environment. Its VBScript reliance limits flexibility, generating demand for enhanced language support and speed improvement. Users appreciate its role in continuous integration and deployment processes, managing test data efficiently, and reducing manual testing efforts.
What are the key features of OpenText Functional Testing?In industries like finance and healthcare, OpenText Functional Testing is leveraged for end-to-end automation, ensuring streamlined processes and accuracy in testing. Many companies utilize it for efficient test data management and integrating testing within continuous integration/deployment operations.
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.
