OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise vs OpenText UFT One comparison

"The tool is very easy to set up and get running."

"LoadRunner Enterprise's best feature is the detailed reporting structure."

"The initial setup was straightforward. I was able to download everything myself without any IT support."

"This is a product that has a lot of capabilities and is the most mature tool of its kind in the market."

"It's a very powerful tool."

"We implemented through the vendor, who used highly-skilled professionals."

"What I like most in Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is the comparison between two different exhibitions which gives value to my company. I also like that the solution is user-friendly, especially in terms of making specific changes. For example, in the past, you can't see the changes when you upload scripts into the Performance Center, but now, it has that visibility, so whenever you want, you can change the script in the Performance Center. I also like that Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is the only tool you can utilize for all your needs, even for different protocols and scripting. The solution also has the latest features, for example, networkability, where it can, within the UI, follow the waterfall model. You can use the insights in the Performance Center of Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise to address or test URLs that usually take up much time."

"The solution offers helpful guidelines and has good documentation."

"The production and the efficiency of making your test cases can be very high."

"Compared to other products, UFT One is better, faster, and more accurate."

"It's easy to use for beginners and non-technical people."

"It is very simple to use, and the scripting language is even easier."

"The entire framework is very useful. It's easily integrable with Excel."

"Object Repository Technology, which is a good mean to identify graphical components of the applications under test."

"The stop automation is a great feature."

"Micro Focus UFT One is a great tool and can be used in a variety of ways."

"I have seen some users report some issues, but I have personally not had any issues."

"We'd like the product to include protocol identifiers whenever a tester wants to test a new application."

"On the newer versions, I think the bleeding edge is still being worked on."

"The installation has not been straightforward, and we have had so many problems. We have had to re-install, try to install on a different machine, etc. We have not been able to launch the LRE server itself yet."

"Integration can be tricky during the setup process."

"I believe the data that demonstrates the automated correlations should be corrected."

"The support team needs to be more coordinated."

"The product's scalability must be improved."

"I would like Micro Focus to provide more information on their portal about their newer products. The information about UFT One was outdated. The image recognition features could also be better."

"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."

"Micro Focus UFT One could improve by having more maintenance. Every time when we run the solution and develop something, the next time when we run it it doesn't recognize the object. I have to redesign the object again and then run the solution. It's really a headache, it's not consistent."

"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."

"The tool needs to improve its performance since it can become heavy."

"Sometimes UFT can take a while to open and sometimes will run slower than expected."

"It doesn't support Telerik UI controls and we are currently looking for a patch for this."

"One area for improvement is its occasional slowness."

"LoadRunner Enterprise's price is high."

"We got an 80 percent discount for the product. It was cost-effective, but licenses tend to get expensive."

"This solution can be expensive."

"I rate the product's pricing a three out of ten."

"The price of Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise could improve, it is expensive."

"It is a bit expensive, especially for smaller organizations, but over-all it can save you money."

"I have not been directly involved in price negotiations but my understanding is that while the cost is a little bit high, it provides good value for the money."

"We are content with the pricing and find it to be reasonable in terms of value for money."

"The pricing fee is good. If someone makes use of the solution once a day for a half hour then the fee will be more expensive. For continuous use and application of the solution to different use cases, the fee is average."

"The licensing and pricing model is confusing."

"The solution is priced reasonably for what features it is providing. However, it might be expensive for some."

"It's an expensive solution."

"There are no additional costs involved apart from the standard license."

"The price is one aspect that could be improved."

"Its price is reasonable compared to other vendors."

"It's a yearly subscription. There are no additional costs to the standard subscription."