OpenText UFT One Reviews

I have used UFT for web application automation, desktop application automation, and Oracle ERP automation.

UFT provides object identification, which is one of the easiest to use. It requires less coding, has built-in features for API testing, and most importantly, it supports more than just web applications. UFT supports Oracle, SAP, PeopleSoft, and other non-web applications, making automation feasible.

We use OpenText as an archive server for archiving purposes from SAP, or we use OpenText in the context of vendor invoice management.

We can easily achieve a return on investment in one, two, or three years. It depends on the business revenue.

I use UFT One for GUI testing, specifically to test web applications across various technologies. I also use it for automating desktop application tests, including applications built in Java. Additionally, I conduct mobile testing for Android applications, utilizing parametrized actions.

Automation of tests is done very fast with UFT One. In a couple of hours, many tests can be created, which significantly reduces costs related to QA testers. This efficiency means there is less need for programming knowledge, making test automation quicker than with tools like Selenium or Cypress.

We migrated a number of the tests from OpenText UFT One to SOAtest. The biggest change was moving from validating in the GUI with OpenText UFT One to validating in the database. We are not currently testing the browser extensively because our webpage is not customer-facing but is instead an administrative tool.

OpenText UFT One offered valuable features by allowing us to build up libraries to streamline repetitive tasks, making scripting much easier. However, it required knowledge of the scripting language, VBScript, which is limited compared to Visual Basic. Despite handling web pages effectively, dependency on the browser for validation presented stability issues when Windows would exhaust memory, causing regression testing crashes.

We use the solution on web applications. Recently, we used it for a data validation service. We use it for functional test cases. For example, when someone opens an account in a bank, we test that process. This involves backend validations and UI validations on the mainframe. Then, we check if the same data appears correctly on the web application.

We use OpenText UFT One to automate end-to-end flows that involve multiple applications. We can handle combinations of backend, mainframe, and web applications. If we use Selenium, it's not suitable for all these combinations.

The most valuable features are its support for multiple technologies, ease of coding, object repository, and ability to design our own framework. The recording playback feature allows those unfamiliar with coding to use the tool.

I use the solution in my company for process automation and test automation.

The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it offers a lot of application types. The tool offers original scripts. If you respect original stuff, then you will like it. Earlier, it was called QuickTest Professional (QTP), and it was later changed and branded as OpenText UFT One. The tool is easy to use and is an original solution. If someone has had an experience with the tool for a long time, they can use it even now.

The solution's recording option is the most beneficial for test script creation and maintenance. Using the protocols, I can test a huge variety of applications in a company. If I implement OpenText UFT One in a project, I can test almost 90% or more of the tools used in highly digitalized banks.

The most useful feature is the recording option because it allows an expert user and a junior user to do a script in comparable ways.

The solution should have additional features, but not much. It already has some sort of artificial intelligence that must be developed. It needs to be in trend. The solution needs better marketing, training, promotion, and visibility because it is not visible.

Often, people with open-source tools and only open-source knowledge take projects that OpenText should have taken.

OpenText UFT One is currently used in our company, MLC, which Insignia Financial has recently purchased. Our organization is in the process of migrating our platform to the ones used in Insignia Financial, and as a part of our planning, we aim to standardize the tools in our company.

I do not use testing tools in the company. There is a separate testing team in our organization that uses testing solutions. I am only involved in the area of technical service for the platform. I look into areas like the ecosystem's cost, licensing, and standardization. Some in-house personnel in our company manage the area of testing capability, but a lot of it is outsourced to some other party.