Tricentis Tosca Reviews

I think the most valuable features are:

• Scriptless testing
• Modules (object repository)
• Test data management
• It can be used by non-technical users, such as business analysts

The product helps us to create very accurate test cases. The goal was not to create plenty of test cases, but only those that cover the most critical parts of our applications.

Some areas have already been improved such as loops and conditions, but there is still one major issues. If you need to improve one of the Tosca engines, you have to develop it in the same language, such as C# and Java. So you need more technical experts to help you. QTP is more flexible on that point. Tosca must recognize more controls than it does currently.

I've used it for two years, and I spent only a few months in a project for a large insurance company.

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered.

10/10 - it's one of the most efficient support teams I use.

Tosca was chosen by the customer before we started the project.

Everything was already done before we started the project.

It was done through a in-house team, but they worked very closely with the vendor.

You should be very careful if you have to customize Tosca because it could be very expensive, so take your time to evaluate it. Test it with many applications, many objects, and many controls.

We've found TBox to be valuable for scanning applications and automating test cases. In newest version, time of scanning the application has been reduced immensely. Also, there is a lot of ways to identify controls that doesn't have unique IDs, and that process is more stable than before.

TOSCA is quite organized by itself, so it helps us do our job more efficient and quicker.

The ability to create more complex TestCases with "If" and "While" loops (now it provides IF, DO and WHILE statements, but they can't really be implemented the way we are used to use those loops).

I've used the latest version for about three to four months, though TOSCA in general for more than a year-and-a-half.

N/A

Some issues with stability, but those are minor errors. Some errors happen without obvious reasons, or they're not obvious to me yet.

N/A

Customer Service:

N/A

Technical Support:

Generally, the support is good, but they give too many generic answers. Sometimes the problem is more direct and it requires deeper and longer thinking. That could be a bit improved.

Something in the middle. It's not really for somebody who is not passionate about testing. It's great for somebody who thinks about all the aspects of the TestCase.

Great tool for testing, but only when used by an educated tester or by somebody who's gone through the whole course and had at least a little bit of practice. It's worth it.

Testcase design is most valuable, as it has helped in 2 different aspects. Storing the test data in one place, and deciding how many test cases are needed for a given scenario using one of the inbuilt algorithms, thereby ensuring the test coverage.

We used the TCD (red folder to design the test flow), and it was easy to get the tests reviewed by the subject-matter experts as it allowed systematic review of Testcases. Once it was OKd by the SME, we could confidently run the tests for regression.

Most of us have had the complaint that loop statements are missing, without which testing in reality was difficult, as many times Test scenarios needed to be run in iteration and version 8.4 has included this feature.

When I did work with v7.4, I often noticed that the Tosca executor abruptly hung and only way out was to kill the process. But this has been drastically improved in the later versions.

I would rate 3/5 as there is not much knowledge base available on the internet for one to independently solve the issues encountered, which is easily available and in abundance for other tools like QTP.

We previously (for six years) used QTP, and the client chose to have only Tosca for test automation as the license costs were lower compared to the HP tools.

The initial set up was complex as we had always used keywords and integrated Excel, pdf and word documents for storing Test evidence, it was difficult to achieve the same standard of Test evidence with Tosca. Not having the flexibility to code was posing a problem in the initial days.

The tool was always installed by a dedicated team from the vendor as we had not had an opportunity to know in detail how the installation worked.

ROI has been pretty high, but only in comparison to the tools we had from HP earlier. However, maintenance costs, and not having Tosca experts available, are the factors that have adversely affected the ROI in some cases.

I would advise that, if one needs to install Tosca for test automation, always go for the latest version, as Tricentis is implemeting all the user feedbacks genuinely in their tools and it is evolving and has a great potential.

• Test cases design
• Model based test automation

From a services perspective, it allows us to scale up test automation teams very quickly, because test analysts can contribute to the test automation effort without the need for scripting/coding skills.

From our clients perspective (e.g. large banks, government organisations etc.), it has allowed them to decrease their total execution effort, improve their time to market, and increase their total risk coverage.

I've used it for three years.

Customer Service:

Customer service is very good. The online chat has extremely quick response times (average of 10s wait), and the staff are knowledgeable.

Technical Support:

Technical support, is very good. The online chat has extremely quick response times (average of 10s wait), and the staff are knowledgeable.

The Test Automation team at TTC use many other test automation tools/solutions, and have chosen Tosca as our preferred tool because of it's unique model based approach to test automation. We have found this approach to have many benefits including; ease of use, extendability, robustness, maintainability and scalability.

The initial set up and install for Tosca is very straightforward. The client install takes less than an hour, and the only other components required are a license server, and a database. If the right people are available (e.g. System Administrator and DataBase Administrator) then the full infrastructure can be set up on day one.

Generally we see our clients achieve positive ROI within one to three years. This is along with other non-financial benefits which can be achieved immediately e.g. decreased execution time.

We would always advise customers to have experts involved during a test automation implementation. Generally, we recommend conducting a POC to prove that the solution works technically for your systems, then we recommend a pilot project, to prove that the business benefits can be realized, and to provide experience about the product. Along with the POC and the pilot, a portfolio analysis should also be conducted to determine which test suites should be automated.

Expert consultants, like our test automation specialists, should conduct the POC and be heavily involved in the pilot. With an ongoing involvement during subsequent projects, and can also be brought in to supplement the team.

Try the Tosca Udemy course and download a trial to get a feel for Tosca as a product. Then, reach out to the local Tricentis Partner or the Tricentis Services Team for help with a POC and ongoing Tosca implementation. Ask for case studies and reference sites from any consultancy company when implementing any test automation tool. These case studies/references should ideally be local and tool specific. Expertise in other tools doesn't always translate to successful implementation in another.

• Complete or partial test automation
• Methodology for reducing the number of test cases needed along with high risk coverage
• Easy way to prioritize requirements
• Ease of test case maintenance
• It can be used by people with no previous programming knowledge
• Agile

Test case automation and ease of test case maintenance through Tosca has reduced the manpower needed for testing, reducing the time needed for testing, and has thus saved money. Management of projects also got a lot easier.

• They could improve scanning of the applications under test
• Useful tips could be improved
• Better and graeter number of examples in manuals
• Reduced cost of licenses

I've used it since March 2014.

Sometimes it is a bit slow when the project is too big and too complex. If there are custom controls being used, sometimes a scanning of the system under test lasts longer than it should.

Customer Service:

Medium to high. (always quick to response, but sometimes not that helpful).

Technical Support:

Medium to high. (always quick to response, but sometimes not that helpful).

We previously used HP Application Lifecycle Management for manual testing. We chose to switch to Tosca because of the test case automation and it offers easier management.

Initial setup is pretty much straightforward, but the licenses need to be managed separately the after setup.

We implement it through an in-house team.

ROI is high because of the market that is switching more and more to agile, automated testing, and our company also develops add-on for Tosca.

There are four types of licenses available, and you should use one that best suits your resources and preconditions. Because of expensive licenses, if your company is new to the market, do not start a business using Tosca if you expect slow growth - use cheaper solutions instead, and switch to Tosca once you are overwhelmed with projects and work.

The test automation function is independent of the technology used by the drag & drop functionality.

The project that I used this product on did not have a professional test management approach within the test activities they had for their IT systems. That's why they implemented automated testing with Tosca Testsuite, and the manual effort got reduced. At the same time, the replication of test processes was raised by up to 100%. This made the bug analysis for their software development much easier.

There's not much. The release cycles of the vendor are much faster than what companies can implement. Sometimes, out of the box functionalities are reduced to reduce the tools complexity, but then customers do miss some functionalities they had in the past.

I've used it for two years.

Not part of my job, but during the upgrade our IT departmend faced several issues in the installation process of the new version.

Similar issues within the execution of automated tests occurred, but they were solved within the configuration settings and/or with the help of the vendor.

No issues encountered.

Customer Service:

Best I have ever seen.

Technical Support:

Best I have ever seen.

Not as part of this project, but I used HP Quality Center as a test tool before. I found it much easier to learn as Tosca Testsuite has been devleoped for users with a very good and intuitive user interface.

The main installation was already done when I started. The setup of work areas, and multi-user workspaces is very easy and straightforward. Different options are described very well in the user manual.

Not sure, but I think the basic installation was done by a vendor team.

It's hard to calculate because there is no base available to compare with. However, test automation and management setup can be done very fast, and it has lower real costs when compared to doing a manual test execution for three or four times.

The department did an evaluation between HP Quality Center and TOSCA before my assignment started. The main reasons for choosing Tosca Testsuite was its easier usability as well as lower costs.

Check the efforts of your manual testing per application every year, and then decide on what, and how, to automate. Usually there should be an ROI at the latest, after using Tosca Testsuite for two years.

I mostly use the TOSCA Commander to create test cases. I also utilize the Tbox feature to automate complex test scenarios. Lastly, I find the requirements linking very useful in analysis after a release (i.e. test coverage, etc.).

The product is very useful in keeping track of test execution and coverage. This is because it has a feature called Execution List which shows resources and the test cases they have executed. There is also a tab for Requirements where the test cases can be linked.

So, by combining those two together, you will be able to see which test cases are mapped to requirements, and if they have been executed. You will also see the number of passed and failed test cases. It is very easy to use once you know all the features. It barely crashes and recovers gracefully most of the time.

The product, at times, does not recognize objects, especially in web applications. It would be good to have that fixed in the next version. As a work around, you have to use the feature called TBox which allows you to scan complex objects.

I have been using it for more than six months.

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered.

The initial setup was hassle free. Although, it would be great if the documentation for the initial set up would include more screenshots and a troubleshooting section.

• Test case design
• Shows results in the requirements section
• Manual test cases
• Automation

Test automation – how you can record the module. It’s already easier to record than it was, but there is still room for improvement.

UI has gotten better but could still be improved.

There are some keyword shortcuts in test case design and in general that could be introduced. Sometimes everything is too big – it’s hard to describe.

I've used it for four years.

Not so far because we only started automating now. So far we have not tried to move the existing project to a new version- we just started.

With the license stability, we have had a lot of issues. There were many interruptions to the connection and took two-three weeks and have installed the license ourselves.

We just started – it should be ok.

Customer Service:

Quite good – they were trying to solve the problem.

Technical Support:

It was ok. I have seen better. They tried to find solutions quickly so that is a plus, and they always called back when there was an appointment or said they would call back.

No previous version was used.

Straightforward – only problem was with the license server.

We looked at Ranorex and Eggplant. We decided to go with Testsuite because you can integrate manual test cases and you can see the reports in a nice way and see how the test case is going in the requirement section.