Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Appium vs Mendix vs OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Mindshare comparison

Mobile Development Platforms Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Appium3.9%
OutSystems17.5%
Mendix16.7%
Other61.900000000000006%
Mobile Development Platforms
Mobile Development Platforms Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Mendix16.7%
OutSystems17.5%
Salesforce Platform7.8%
Other58.0%
Mobile Development Platforms
Mobile App Testing Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web3.5%
Tricentis Tosca33.1%
OpenText Functional Testing21.1%
Other42.3%
Mobile App Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Luis Gerardo Meneses Hernandez - PeerSpot reviewer
Allows for direct interaction with an application's DOM but complex configuration
What I like about Appium right now is that it's like Cypress in the sense that I can get to the new DOM of the application and select the components and create the functions to test the components in the way I want them to be tested. That's why I like it right now.
Richard Van Den Akker - PeerSpot reviewer
Cloud-based, helps fill gaps and that seamlessly integrates with existing systems
Mendix provides the ability to create solutions that fill gaps that I would otherwise be unable to address with standard software. It integrates seamlessly with my existing ERP systems, enabling me to build attractive and user-specific solutions. Its cloud-based platform supports agile methods and enhances my development speed. These features enable me to better meet my organizational needs.
Robinson Caiado - PeerSpot reviewer
Automates mobile solutions while boosting productivity and fostering innovation
It allows multiple devices to be used and gives flexibility in adding devices when a project is needed. Most of the time, I have several devices where it is predefined. We can use it, but sometimes, we must scale it in a particular situation. It's very flexible. It is very important because we can use a different approach to software testing, for example, to find a way to execute UFT software testing with only one execution. This reproduces all the platforms that we need.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Appium's wide support of programming languages is valuable."
"We get a list that shows all devices that are connected to the system."
"It has great documentation and excellent community support."
"The automation part is extremely helpful in streamlining our processes."
"Appium has easy interaction with mobile."
"We develop apps using the React Native framework, and Appium integrates well for testing those apps. The Appium automation framework also has good integration with GitHub Actions and plenty of other tools and frameworks, including BrowserStack."
"The solution helps with test automation. We focus mostly on Java."
"The most valuable feature of Appium is it supports iOS and AOS and is open-source."
"What I found most valuable in Mendix is that it's very much suitable for mobile apps such as native Android or IOS supported mobile apps. The multiple features of the platform are very, very attractive and very popular. Mendix has technical features such as microflows and nanoflows. You can also access data models in the platform. These are the features that are very, very strong in Mendix. I got my hands dirty on other low-code platforms, but I have not seen such strong features in them compared to the microflows, nanoflows, and data model access that are in Mendix, including creating and integration. The platform has out-of-the-box adapters or out-of-the-box-connectors that you can integrate with different interface applications such as SAP, Salesforce, Oracle EBS, etc."
"There are free online learning and certifications if a user would like to learn more and better understand the solution."
"I highly regard Mendix because of its proper support, troubleshooting options, extensive learning path, and the availability of different types of exams."
"Mendix has made a great deal of effort to provide its developers a healthy, modern environment for developing. First of all, it adopts Agile methodology by creating a SCRUM-based app where you can handle your user stories. Next comes version control, which really allows multiple team members to collaborate quite easily. And last but not least, Mendix modeler, which is your IDE for developing Mendix apps."
"The development environment is model-driven. We can use the information from this for our business engineers to make the information models, and they can also execute the model."
"I think that the workflow and automation features are quite good."
"The most valuable features are the decorative style, model-driven development, and the fact that Mendix validates flows. Mendix is quick to develop because it's a low-code platform. It's very robust, flexible, open, and scalable. It's for a low-code customer. The tooling is also really good and it has mobile capabilities."
"The initial setup is easy."
"The product is easy to use."
"The solution is easy to use. There are features to orchestrate mobile testing, including mobile testing automation. You can test different devices at the same time."
"The fact that it allows users to test on real mobile devices instead of emulators is something that projects have told us is beyond compare."
"It is a complete solution for mobile application testing."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is virtualization."
"For automation testing, the tool provides the record and playback option, which helps with object detection easily."
"There are numerous valuable features such as automation, the ones that facilitate importing and synchronization capabilities between our platform, Jira, and Azure DevOps."
 

Cons

"The installation part of Appium is somewhat clumsy, requiring numerous dependencies and configurations."
"We previously worked with native applications, and there weren't any good mobile app testing tools. We started working with React Native, which works well with Appium, but it would be good to see better integration; the way elements are displayed can be messy. React Native is very popular nowadays, so it's essential to have that compatibility."
"An application developed on the Unity platform, such as a gaming application, objects are moving in that case. Interacting with those elements is still lacking in Appium. Appium doesn't have the internal library to play with the Unity platform. That is a huge lack right now."
"If it had more facility for configuration it would be a spectacular solution."
"I rarely use Appium nowadays because I'm now at the managerial level, but the last time I used it, whenever I selected and clicked on an element, Appium was very slow. I tried to debug it, but I still couldn't find the problem, so this is an area for improvement in the solution. Another area for improvement lies with the connector and server. For example, the effort to get into the local machine sometimes causes the emulator to become slow, which then leads to failure in testing, and this is the usual issue I've encountered from Appium. An additional feature I'd like added to Appium in its next release is being able to do automation in iOS without using XPath and the name of the element. In Xcode, you can use previous UI tests for detecting elements, but in Appium, you have to use Xpath and the element name instead of being able to directly put the X-UiPath, which is what you can do in Xcode. In iOS as well, sometimes the element doesn't have a name or a path. Sometimes, there's also no element."
"One area where I think Appium could improve is in addressing security concerns for our data. Currently, we're unable to use cloud solutions like CloudForm due to security restrictions on our servers. We also face challenges in updating packages for the same reason. It would be beneficial if the solution could provide better support for auto-reporting and easier connections to mobile device farms."
"We haven't been able to fully leverage Appium for multiple reasons. I think number one is just that the tests take a long time to run. We have had some issues around just the results themselves and how predictable they are, but those are not issues with Appium directly."
"The user interface needs improvement because there are issues when setting up environment variables."
"I struggle with solutions like Mendix in terms of creating enterprise solutions."
"While the documentation is good, the development box could be better."
"The code refactoring tools could be better, especially for applications running for years. It's not bad, but it could be smoother. Also, writing new widgets can be trickier than it should be for some people, but not if you're familiar with Mendix."
"We'd like to be able to write in C Sharp to develop code for Mendix."
"It is expensive."
"Mendix needs to think about itself offering machine learning and artificial intelligence."
"I would like to see more documentation as well as how-to documents."
"An improvement I would like to see is the ability to version manage independent modules. Their version management for software repositories must be better. It's good and you can do it, but it needs work."
"They should introduce a pay-per-use subscription model."
"The documentation and user interface both need improvement."
"We need to scale devices easily. Some customers would like to loop in AWS or other cloud providers to check if their devices have the cloud factor. OpenText UFT Digital Lab needs to improve it."
"OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web could benefit from implementing a low-code, no-code solution that aids in quick automation code preparation."
"We like to host the tools centrally. We would need them to be multi-tenants, so different projects could log on and have their own set of devices and their own set of apps, and they wouldn't see data from other projects that are using it."
"For the most part, the key challenge is ensuring that customers fully utilize the product as intended and adopt the appropriate frameworks to implement the solutions effectively."
"The product's object detection method needs to be improved since it can help testers do perfect testing."
"I would like to see more integration with automation tools."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is open source so it is free."
"This is an open source solution so it does not cost anything for licensing or otherwise."
"It's open source, so it's completely free."
"It's completely 100% free, and there are no hidden fees."
"The price is good for people to be able to make a favorable decision for the value."
"We found out that we could explore features of the solution for 30 days trial. We can switch to a permanent license later if we want."
"I'm unsure if there's any cost associated with Appium. I got the free package which includes the server GUI application and the inspector application, and it was free to download, and that's all I need to get my work done. I'm not aware of any additional costs associated with the tool."
"There is no license for this solution because it is open-source."
"Mendix is not open source, but its license cost is cheap, particularly when compared to the Appian license. The license model would depend on how many users you have and how many applications you are creating. If you are creating a single app, you just need to have a single app license, so it's free. If you want a multiple app license to cover two thousand or three thousand users, for example, internal users or external users, then you need to pay for the license. There's also a license model for above three thousand or four thousand, or five thousand internal and external users."
"Pricing used to be complex, but Mendix has improved that quite a bit."
"Licensing costs are similar to those for all other IT technology, but they vary by region."
"From a commercial point of view, we would like them to change that they currently sell it as a platform, but as a customer you have to decide upfront the usage of the platform. We would like to have Mendix sell it as a pay as you go model: You pay for what you use, and you don't pay for what you don't use."
"Its cost is higher than competitors. The cost mostly includes licensing. It is charged per user. The cost model could be better. When you have a big company, what does per user mean? If I have a company where I have 40,000 people who will go to access it but only 200 do, how do you license it and who do you pay for? If they hit it once, do you pay for it? The licensing is complex for a big company. It is easy for us to buy all we can eat, get an enterprise license agreement, and call it good."
"There is a license required to use Mendix. The solution's price is high, but it is best suited for enterprise companies that have the budget. It is not for small or medium-sized businesses."
"Mendix licensing cost is based on the number of apps you have on the server. At the basic level, it is free of charge, so that seems reasonable, but once you go beyond that, and when it comes to the number of users on the app, that basic structure doesn't work, and the pricing tends to get a little bit steep."
"Mendix seems a bit expensive. But in terms of wanting to have less developers and higher velocity, the total cost of ownership is fine. It's not cheap, though."
"OpenText UFT Digital Lab's pricing is average, and I rate it a five out of ten."
"The product could be more affordable."
"While the pricing may seem relatively high, when compared to competitors, it often falls in line or can even be more cost-effective."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Mobile Development Platforms solutions are best for your needs.
866,324 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
20%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Retailer
6%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
10%
University
7%
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Non Profit
10%
Educational Organization
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise19
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business24
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise21
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise13
 

Questions from the Community

Do you recommend Appium?
I do recommend Appium. It is an open-source solution and completely free of charge. We use Appium and Appium Studio a...
What do you like most about Appium?
Appium helps me to do as much as much as I want to.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Appium?
My experience with Appium from a pricing perspective is favorable due to it being open source, making it a cost-effec...
What do you like most about Mendix?
We also use Mendix Enterprise Integration for complex business logic. It's a low-code platform, so we run Mendix in t...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Mendix?
I have some idea about the licensing part, and it depends on the person and the number of applications.
What needs improvement with Mendix?
Currently, I do not see any improvements needed in Mendix. However, I have not used Mendix for the last few months, s...
What do you like most about Micro Focus UFT Mobile?
For automation testing, the tool provides the record and playback option, which helps with object detection easily.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus UFT Mobile?
OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web could benefit from implementing a low-code, no-code solution that ...
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus UFT Mobile?
OpenText Functional Testing Lab for Mobile and Web can be used for a range of applications, not just web and mobile. ...
 

Also Known As

No data available
No data available
Micro Focus UFT Digital Lab, Micro Focus UFT Mobile, Mobile Center, Micro Focus Mobile Center, HPE Mobile Center
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Nuvizz, Coupa Software, Eventbrite, Evernote
Genzyme, TNT, Yahoo, Capgemini, Roche, D&B, Aegon, kpn, AZL, Sky, Arch, Penn State Univeristy, BancABC
Bci, BPER Services, Die Mobiliar, Harvard Pilgrim Healthcare, HPE, Independent Health, Shanghai OnStar Telematics, Pick n Pay, UCB
Find out what your peers are saying about OutSystems, Salesforce, Mendix and others in Mobile Development Platforms. Updated: August 2025.
866,324 professionals have used our research since 2012.