We performed a comparison between IBM Rational Test Workbench and OpenText UFT One based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Postman, Tricentis, Apache and others in API Testing Tools."This solution provides for API testing, functional UI testing, performance testing, and service virtualization."
"Reporting is pretty good. Its interface is also good. I'm overall pretty happy with the functionality and use of IBM Rational Test Workbench."
"Has improved our organization by allowing us to obtain fast, detailed information about the behavior of our products and to supply this to the customer, enabling us to work together without the need for special programming knowledge."
"The best feature of UFT by far is its compatibility with a large variety of products, tools and technologies. It is currently a challenge to find a single tool on the market besides UFT that will successfully automate tests for so many projects and environments."
"The most valuable features for us are the GUI, the easy identification of objects, and folder structure creation."
"The entire framework is very useful. It's easily integrable with Excel."
"The shared repositories can be used throughout all testing which makes jobs easier."
"Compared to other products, UFT One is better, faster, and more accurate."
"The production and the efficiency of making your test cases can be very high."
"For traditional automation, approximately half of our tests end up automated. Therefore, we are saving half the testing time by pushing it off to automation. That gives it an intrinsic benefit of more time for manual testers and business testers to work on possibly more important and interesting things. For some of our applications, they don't just have to do happy path testing anymore, they can go more in-depth and breadth into the process."
"It should have more interfaces. In terms of interfaces or protocols, what you can do with Rational is far limited as compared to other products out there. What it does, it does great, but it only gives you limited types of protocols. It supports between 8 to 15 types of protocols, whereas other test tools give you 20 to 30 types of protocols with which you can do testing and convert to script. It records Javascript-based scripts, and you got to know a little bit of Java to basically be able to edit them, but the level of editing you got to do is very low. I like that, but the ability to edit the script is not as good as Parasoft or LoadRunner, which have C-Script."
"There are a number of things that they can do to simplify the tools, but the most important thing that they need to do is simplify the installation."
"The artificial intelligence functionality is applicable only on the web, and it should be expanded to cover non-web applications as well."
"They should include an automated feature to load backlog tests."
"It doesn't support Telerik UI controls and we are currently looking for a patch for this."
"Jumping to functions is supported from any Action/BPT Component code, but not from inside a function library where the target function exists in another library file. Workaround: Select search entire project for the function."
"They need to reduce the cost because it is pretty high. It's approximately $3,000 per user."
"Object identification has room for improvement, to make it more efficient."
"Sometimes it appears that UFT takes a while to open and sometimes will run slower than expected. Also, UFT uses a lot of memory. On this note, if you are running UFT on a virtual server I would add more RAM memory than the minimum requirements especially when using multiple add-ins. HP is pretty good about coming out with new patches to fix known issues and it pays for the user to check for new patches and updates on a regular basis."
"It should consume less CPU, and the licensing cost could be lower."
Earn 20 points
IBM Rational Test Workbench is ranked 12th in API Testing Tools while OpenText UFT One is ranked 4th in API Testing Tools with 89 reviews. IBM Rational Test Workbench is rated 7.6, while OpenText UFT One is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of IBM Rational Test Workbench writes "Good reporting and interface, but supports limited types of protocols and requires low-level script editing". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText UFT One writes "With regularly occurring releases, a QA team member can schedule tests, let the tests run unattended, and then examine the results". IBM Rational Test Workbench is most compared with Postman, whereas OpenText UFT One is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText UFT Developer, Katalon Studio, SmartBear TestComplete and UiPath Test Suite.
See our list of best API Testing Tools vendors and best Test Automation Tools vendors.
We monitor all API 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.
