Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users
2025-07-07T13:50:00Z

Why Your Next Test Automation Script Might Start with an iPhone Photo: UFT One’s AI Brings Vision to Testing

Don Ingerson - PeerSpot reviewer
  • 27
Updated:Jul 11, 2025
Search for a product comparison in Functional Testing Tools
PeerSpot user
PeerSpot user
Learn what your peers think about OpenText Functional Testing. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: June 2025.
861,390 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Related Questions
TJ
Sep 6, 2023
Sep 6, 2023
Hi peers, I work at a large financial services firm and am researching testing tools. What are the differences between SmartBear TestComplete and Micro Focus UFT One? Which one do you recommend? Thank you for your help.
See 1 answer
it_user2268669 - PeerSpot reviewer
Sep 6, 2023
SmartBear TestComplete and Micro Focus UFT One are comprehensive Automated Testing tools used for various applications, but to determine which of the two best fits your organization, have a look at these pros and cons: SmartBear TestComplete Pros: Easy to use Wide range of features Suitable for beginners and experienced testers Cons: Can be expensive Not as scalable as Micro Focus UFT One Micro Focus UFT One Pros: Scalable Powerful features Good for large organizations Cons: More complex to use than SmartBear TestComplete Not as suitable for beginners To pick out the best testing tool, consider your needs or requirements. For example, if you are looking for an easy-to-use tool for beginners, SmartBear TestComplete may be a good option. If you belong to a large organization and need a scalable testing tool, it may be best to go with Micro Focus UFT One.
NC
Nov 11, 2022
Nov 11, 2022
We reviewed MicroFocus UFT One but ultimately chose to use Tricentis Tosca because we needed API testing. MicroFocus UFT is a performance and functional testing tool. We tested it, and it was well suited for CI integrations. We liked it, in particular, because it integrates greatly with other platforms, like .net, QC and Jenkins. An added advantage was the multi-device support. One of the bes...
See 2 answers
Nov 2, 2021
We reviewed MicroFocus UFT One but ultimately chose to use Tricentis Tosca because we needed API testing. MicroFocus UFT is a performance and functional testing tool. We tested it, and it was well suited for CI integrations. We liked it, in particular, because it integrates greatly with other platforms, like .net, QC and Jenkins. An added advantage was the multi-device support. One of the best advantages of MicroFocus is that it integrates with legacy web technologies and even Windows client applications. Finally, MicroFocus supports cross-browser testing. Regardless of many features, including a test combinations generator and insight recording, it is relatively easy to learn. That being said, it doesn’t support multiple formats of reporting. For now, UFT only supports exporting reports in HTML or PDF. MicroFocus should allow exporting to Excel, CSV, XML, and other formats. There is a bit of performance degradation of the test environment when executing automation scripts continuously for a long time. The execution can be inconsistent sometimes, and scripting takes a long time. Another downside is the high licensing price. Tricentis Tosca is an integrated testing solution that includes testing automation and case design approach, risk-based testing, test data management, and service virtualization. The best feature is its versatility in helping both web and desktop applications. It is very reliable and stable. Another great feature is that you can reuse test cases. The platform supports multiple technologies and devices. It is truly end-to-end. Because it is scriptless, anyone can learn to use it. As much as we like it, there are downsides to Tosca, too. The price is one of them. It runs a bit expensive, but it is worth it. The test design section is complicated to learn, and the UI takes time to get used to. Conclusions Tosca is a better solution in terms of usability and versatility. MicroFocus is better for organizations with legacy web applications.
Kevin Copple - PeerSpot reviewer
Nov 11, 2022
Both products are very useful but it really depends on what you need to test and who is building the tests.  We recently chose UFT One over Tosca in a specific use case where identifying images inside a map was needed.  UFT uses both OCR and Image recognition where in Tosca you would have to identify specific pixels and those pixels could move depending on what device you were using.   From a test building perspective, I feel it is easier to build tests in UFT One than in Tosca.  UFT One also gives you the ability to develop tests by either writing code or using the record and convert to code option (Allows developers and Business users to work together to build/update the same test).   If you can provide more info on what you are testing and your key drivers, I can try and give more info on what tool may be best.
Download Free Report
Download our free OpenText Functional Testing Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: June 2025.
DOWNLOAD NOW
861,390 professionals have used our research since 2012.