There are many open-source tools with no cost, and there are no-code tools that are less expensive than UFT. The pricing of UFT, being an established tool, could be better if reduced.
Founder and CEO at a computer software company with 1-10 employees
Real User
2024-11-19T17:19:14Z
Nov 19, 2024
This is a very old question and many of the answers are misleading which gives poor information to the reader. There appears to be much confusion on both the price and license types. I gave an answer back in October 2021 about the license types, which is still correct.
So, I'm correcting some of the misconceptions:
OpenText now owns the tools previously owned by Micro Focus.
There is a free trail. The duration can be extended for valid reason. 😊
An individual license is cheaper than has been quoted (find me on LinkedIn and message me directly and I will share the price)
I doubt that buying through SAP is cheaper, based on several examples I have seen. Enough said!
Buy the right license and it can be shared between team members.
The tool is priced per license, so the more licenses you buy, the more you pay.
If you have not looked at the tool for 2+ years, it is worth looking again. It has AI capability build it (at no extra cost) that simplifies scripting and script maintenance.
If you are interested in UFT One, please get in contact with me via LinkedIn.
OpenText UFT One is a very expensive solution. The solution's pricing is too high for the level of support and quality they offer. OpenText has extremely powerful tools. If you ask me to choose the best tool for a huge international telecom, an international bank, or an international oil and gas company, I will choose OpenText. However, the tool has glitches that are visible to the customer. Since OpenText asks for a very high price, they should solve those glitches in at least a couple of years. Since there are glitches that have been unsolved for many years, I consider the pricing to be too high for what they offer. I follow the OpenText pricing model because OpenText is actually selling, not me. I sell to my customers through my company, but I have to sell according to OpenText price metrics. When I propose functionalities to the customer, I propose the whole bundle, and then we discuss the price. The price is written individually on every offer.
Founder and CEO at a computer software company with 1-10 employees
Real User
Nov 20, 2024
@Victor Horescu - Is it? The value of a tool is not measured in money, but in value added and time saved. A screw driver is cheaper than a powered screwdriver. I still own a power screwdriver and am happy to pay the extra for it. I think UFT One creates significant value and because it can test Web, Mobile GUI and API. What other tools can do that? I have always found that when you report defects to support, they fix the issues. Fun fact: Microsoft have bugs in Outlook, Word and Excel that have existed for many years.
The pricing of the product is an issue. The other product that my company is considering against OpenText UFT One is an equally bad solution. The aforementioned statement proves that pricing may not be a criterion when planning to purchase a solution, but our company needs to look into how much investment we have on the platform we use compared to other subsidiaries where some alternate products are used.
Compared to other products, the solution is very expensive. For the coverage and accuracy that it provides, the product is good compared to other products. However, it is a difficult solution. The time spent learning the solution also costs the organization. I rate the pricing a seven or eight out of ten.
Founder and CEO at a computer software company with 1-10 employees
Real User
2021-10-17T16:17:12Z
Oct 17, 2021
I can't share investment costs, however, I can explain the different models for purchasing it. Plus, it is not as expensive as many think. :)
There are 3 UFT products:
- UFT One – test Web, mobile, GUI/UI and API – so 4 tools in 1
- UFT Developer - is a powerful, lightweight function automation software for Agile and DevOps. It extends the functionality of Selenium, making scripting easier, faster and reducing maintenance.
- UFT Runtime – allows you to run scripts in parallel without needing a full UFT licence.
There are 2 different types of UFT licence:
- Seat - This means that only one Device is authorized to use it. Great for individual testers.
- Concurrent - The software can be installed on any number of computers, provided that the actual usage of the software does not exceed the number of licenses purchased. Global licence. Great for a team to share, assuming they don’t all need to use it at the same time.
You can either buy:
- Permanent (perpetual) licences and then pay annual support each year
- 1-year term licences
For 1-year term licences, a seat licence is approx 70% the cost of a concurrent licence. So, for most concurrent licences are better value for money.
The pricing could definitely be lower. I don't know the prices by heart. I'm not the one who discussed this with Micro Focus. I've heard several times that this is really expensive and we also have problems exactly for that reason. For example, for a user interface test to Selenium. At least when the SUT, the system under test, is web-based. There's not only the buying price. It's also the maintenance price.
The client has a large number of licenses, which they obtained along with their SAP. The SAP licenses include Application LifeCycle Management. And this has been with our client for at least 12 to 15 years. I believe it should be three and a half to four out of five. The price is reasonable. They are inexpensive.
Senior Staff Software Engineer at a computer software company with 51-200 employees
Real User
2022-02-23T10:47:15Z
Feb 23, 2022
UFT One has some competition from open-source solutions, so the license cost needs to be reasonable, and the demo periods need to be longer. Earlier, the demo period was 90 days, but it has been reduced to 60. If we want to cover the market, we need to consider free users, and the demo should be extended for some customers, so they can try the solution and get used to it. Then we can ask them to purchase a license for use.
Practice Head - Automation at Tech Mahindra Limited
Real User
2021-02-01T04:08:00Z
Feb 1, 2021
The license is important. If the license is up and running when you open it, there won't be any issues. Compared to other tools in the market, UFT One is very cheap. The recent Covid pandemic situation also hit customer budgets significantly, so Micro Focus offered some discounted prices, which is definitely competitive.
It could be cheaper. I feel like it is a little expensive, but I never honestly understood the enterprise software space. For example, with Camtasia, if you look at the price of that, and you're like, "That just seems expensive. Why is it so expensive?" As an end-user, you feel like it could be cheaper. I would love to see them do some things to make it a bit more affordable. We have shifted around our licensing techniques because of the price. We started off with all concurrent users, but that was nearly twice the price of a seat license. So, we just kept a couple of concurrent licenses. because we are only paying maintenance on it now and shift to seat licenses to try to save us money. We also shifted to a couple of run-time licenses. We have equal thirds: run-time, seat, and full concurrent licenses. This is because of the costs. I wish you could look at them and price out each individual technology, but I have a feeling it would end up being more costly then. It feels expensive, as it can be upwards of $3,200 a seat or license, depending on how you license it, which sounds expensive. You are getting a lot there. I would love to see if there's anything they can do to reduce the price. We bundle to save, and there is always the ability for them to add discounts. It is like going to the store, where they are like, "Hey, this is on sale." However, if you just didn't raise the price in the beginning, you wouldn't need to have it on sale. The way the pricing model works is that you pay a whole boatload year one. Then, every year after, it is around half or less. Because instead of paying for the new product, you are just paying for the support and maintenance of it. That is probably one of the biggest things that I hear from most people, even at conferences, "Yeah, I would love to use UFT One, but we don't have a budget for it." I expected the AI to require an upfront extra cost in addition to the subscription, and it didn't. There was no cloud service required for it, so I didn't have to go through security hoops because it all runs local. It has more than 10 technologies that it uses. If you are only using two of them, then why pay for all 10? I guess we have just gotten so used to it, e.g., with LoadRunner, you pay for the technologies that you are using. I would hate to see what the LoadRunner license would look like if it was the same structure as UFT One. They are an enterprise product. I get that they are expensive. Somehow, I wish they could be cheaper. I don't know how they could do it. If I could pick on them for one thing, their licensed portal is just abysmal. It is so hard to use. So, the licenses come via three fashions: * You have a licensed server with concurrent licenses where I basically lease the license for the time that my program is open. That one is not too bad and works quite well. You pretty much do a one-time setup of the thing, then you pretty much forget that exists and just go. We have some of these licenses. * We also have seat licenses. This is the one where once it's installed, then it's amazing. However, unless you have a partner that can get it for you, using the portal stinks for getting the actual license. It is a terrible experience. Sometimes, it doesn't even work. When it works, it's great but it could be so much more user-friendly to get the actual license. * You just call your partner or Micro Focus, then they literally mail you a file. That would be easy, but I'm slightly impatient. So, I want the license and I want it now, so I will go into the portal and get it. I usually can go into the portal, as long as it is working, but it's not always the most obvious thing to work with. I can see that they're making it better. It's just not best yet.
The licensing costs are quite high. The more you do automation, the more you spend on the license cost. Due to that, sometimes when there is a boom in spending, you will need to justify the extra cost.
This solution is quite costly and there is no free trial available. We purchased it from SAP because we got a cheaper price. The subscription fees are paid annually.
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...
There are many open-source tools with no cost, and there are no-code tools that are less expensive than UFT. The pricing of UFT, being an established tool, could be better if reduced.
The pricing or licensing policy of OpenText is a bit expensive, however, it's one of the best solutions in the market.
This is a very old question and many of the answers are misleading which gives poor information to the reader. There appears to be much confusion on both the price and license types. I gave an answer back in October 2021 about the license types, which is still correct.
So, I'm correcting some of the misconceptions:
If you are interested in UFT One, please get in contact with me via LinkedIn.
The cost is reasonable considering it is one of the best tools in the market. It's cheaper than Tricentis Tosca but more expensive than some others.
OpenText UFT One is a very expensive solution. The solution's pricing is too high for the level of support and quality they offer. OpenText has extremely powerful tools. If you ask me to choose the best tool for a huge international telecom, an international bank, or an international oil and gas company, I will choose OpenText. However, the tool has glitches that are visible to the customer. Since OpenText asks for a very high price, they should solve those glitches in at least a couple of years. Since there are glitches that have been unsolved for many years, I consider the pricing to be too high for what they offer. I follow the OpenText pricing model because OpenText is actually selling, not me. I sell to my customers through my company, but I have to sell according to OpenText price metrics. When I propose functionalities to the customer, I propose the whole bundle, and then we discuss the price. The price is written individually on every offer.
@Victor Horescu - Is it? The value of a tool is not measured in money, but in value added and time saved. A screw driver is cheaper than a powered screwdriver. I still own a power screwdriver and am happy to pay the extra for it. I think UFT One creates significant value and because it can test Web, Mobile GUI and API. What other tools can do that? I have always found that when you report defects to support, they fix the issues. Fun fact: Microsoft have bugs in Outlook, Word and Excel that have existed for many years.
We have ALM licensing, and the tool is free of cost.
The pricing of the product is an issue. The other product that my company is considering against OpenText UFT One is an equally bad solution. The aforementioned statement proves that pricing may not be a criterion when planning to purchase a solution, but our company needs to look into how much investment we have on the platform we use compared to other subsidiaries where some alternate products are used.
Compared to other products, the solution is very expensive. For the coverage and accuracy that it provides, the product is good compared to other products. However, it is a difficult solution. The time spent learning the solution also costs the organization. I rate the pricing a seven or eight out of ten.
I can't share investment costs, however, I can explain the different models for purchasing it. Plus, it is not as expensive as many think. :)
There are 3 UFT products:
- UFT One – test Web, mobile, GUI/UI and API – so 4 tools in 1
- UFT Developer - is a powerful, lightweight function automation software for Agile and DevOps. It extends the functionality of Selenium, making scripting easier, faster and reducing maintenance.
- UFT Runtime – allows you to run scripts in parallel without needing a full UFT licence.
There are 2 different types of UFT licence:
- Seat - This means that only one Device is authorized to use it. Great for individual testers.
- Concurrent - The software can be installed on any number of computers, provided that the actual usage of the software does not exceed the number of licenses purchased. Global licence. Great for a team to share, assuming they don’t all need to use it at the same time.
You can either buy:
- Permanent (perpetual) licences and then pay annual support each year
- 1-year term licences
For 1-year term licences, a seat licence is approx 70% the cost of a concurrent licence. So, for most concurrent licences are better value for money.
Happy to help if you contact me.
We purchase the solution's yearly license. It costs 700k. There are no additional costs involved.
The solution's price is reasonable compared to other vendors. I rate its pricing as a four.
It's the best pricing compared to other tools on the market. I'd rate it nine out of ten in terms of affordability.
The solution is priced reasonably for what features it is providing. However, it might be expensive for some.
It's a yearly subscription. There are no additional costs to the standard subscription.
The pricing could definitely be lower. I don't know the prices by heart. I'm not the one who discussed this with Micro Focus. I've heard several times that this is really expensive and we also have problems exactly for that reason. For example, for a user interface test to Selenium. At least when the SUT, the system under test, is web-based. There's not only the buying price. It's also the maintenance price.
UFT One's license is somewhere in the $5,000-a-year range.
The client has a large number of licenses, which they obtained along with their SAP. The SAP licenses include Application LifeCycle Management. And this has been with our client for at least 12 to 15 years. I believe it should be three and a half to four out of five. The price is reasonable. They are inexpensive.
UFT One has some competition from open-source solutions, so the license cost needs to be reasonable, and the demo periods need to be longer. Earlier, the demo period was 90 days, but it has been reduced to 60. If we want to cover the market, we need to consider free users, and the demo should be extended for some customers, so they can try the solution and get used to it. Then we can ask them to purchase a license for use.
We have to pay for licenses. The licensing fee is paid on a yearly basis. The price is one aspect that could be improved.
If you use it all the time and for different use cases then it is a good price. If you only use it one time a day for half an hour then it is pricey.
The license is important. If the license is up and running when you open it, there won't be any issues. Compared to other tools in the market, UFT One is very cheap. The recent Covid pandemic situation also hit customer budgets significantly, so Micro Focus offered some discounted prices, which is definitely competitive.
It could be cheaper. I feel like it is a little expensive, but I never honestly understood the enterprise software space. For example, with Camtasia, if you look at the price of that, and you're like, "That just seems expensive. Why is it so expensive?" As an end-user, you feel like it could be cheaper. I would love to see them do some things to make it a bit more affordable. We have shifted around our licensing techniques because of the price. We started off with all concurrent users, but that was nearly twice the price of a seat license. So, we just kept a couple of concurrent licenses. because we are only paying maintenance on it now and shift to seat licenses to try to save us money. We also shifted to a couple of run-time licenses. We have equal thirds: run-time, seat, and full concurrent licenses. This is because of the costs. I wish you could look at them and price out each individual technology, but I have a feeling it would end up being more costly then. It feels expensive, as it can be upwards of $3,200 a seat or license, depending on how you license it, which sounds expensive. You are getting a lot there. I would love to see if there's anything they can do to reduce the price. We bundle to save, and there is always the ability for them to add discounts. It is like going to the store, where they are like, "Hey, this is on sale." However, if you just didn't raise the price in the beginning, you wouldn't need to have it on sale. The way the pricing model works is that you pay a whole boatload year one. Then, every year after, it is around half or less. Because instead of paying for the new product, you are just paying for the support and maintenance of it. That is probably one of the biggest things that I hear from most people, even at conferences, "Yeah, I would love to use UFT One, but we don't have a budget for it." I expected the AI to require an upfront extra cost in addition to the subscription, and it didn't. There was no cloud service required for it, so I didn't have to go through security hoops because it all runs local. It has more than 10 technologies that it uses. If you are only using two of them, then why pay for all 10? I guess we have just gotten so used to it, e.g., with LoadRunner, you pay for the technologies that you are using. I would hate to see what the LoadRunner license would look like if it was the same structure as UFT One. They are an enterprise product. I get that they are expensive. Somehow, I wish they could be cheaper. I don't know how they could do it. If I could pick on them for one thing, their licensed portal is just abysmal. It is so hard to use. So, the licenses come via three fashions: * You have a licensed server with concurrent licenses where I basically lease the license for the time that my program is open. That one is not too bad and works quite well. You pretty much do a one-time setup of the thing, then you pretty much forget that exists and just go. We have some of these licenses. * We also have seat licenses. This is the one where once it's installed, then it's amazing. However, unless you have a partner that can get it for you, using the portal stinks for getting the actual license. It is a terrible experience. Sometimes, it doesn't even work. When it works, it's great but it could be so much more user-friendly to get the actual license. * You just call your partner or Micro Focus, then they literally mail you a file. That would be easy, but I'm slightly impatient. So, I want the license and I want it now, so I will go into the portal and get it. I usually can go into the portal, as long as it is working, but it's not always the most obvious thing to work with. I can see that they're making it better. It's just not best yet.
The license model is quite complex. We have the normal basic license plus some support costs and other things so it depends on a lot of factors.
The licensing costs are quite high. The more you do automation, the more you spend on the license cost. Due to that, sometimes when there is a boom in spending, you will need to justify the extra cost.
This solution is quite costly and there is no free trial available. We purchased it from SAP because we got a cheaper price. The subscription fees are paid annually.