We performed a comparison between Appium and OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about OutSystems, Mendix, Salesforce and others in Mobile Development Platforms."The solution is easy to use."
"It runs completely flawlessly and seamlessly every day."
"The most valuable features of Appium are the in-built functionality, which we can use in our code. For example, move back, move front, navigate one page before, and navigate one page ahead. You can do this by using the in-built functions from Appium."
"The latest versions of the solution are stable."
"Appium has easy interaction with mobile."
"It has great documentation and excellent community support."
"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 library is extensive so the driver interacts with most functions or actions on mobile devices."
"The host performance testing of any application using a host/controller is the most valuable feature."
"Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise Is very user-friendly."
"Creating the script is very easy and user friendly."
"LoadRunner Enterprise's best feature is the detailed reporting structure."
"I think the number one feature everybody likes is the capability to easily generate virtual users as well as the reporting."
"It offers easy integration with third-party tools like Dynatrace, Splunk, etc."
"It is also good for reporting purposes, which would be most familiar for QC and UFT users."
"We can measure metrics like hits per second and detect deviations or issues through graphs. We can filter out response times based on timings and identify spikes in the database or AWS reports."
"Configuration-wise, there is a lot of room for improvement."
"Appium can improve when the case fails, there should be a feature where you can generate the report from Appium. Once you're on a test case, automatically the screenshot should be captured which would avoid manual intervention. These features would be beneficial to migrate to Appium."
"The setup and installation were a problem for us at first."
"The initial setup is straightforward if you have previous experience with the solution, but it can be complicated for a novice user."
"The challenging part with Appium is that installation can be a bit tricky. It can be challenging to set up in Android versus iOS environments."
"Appium has problems with automated validations following iOS updates, causing us to have to validate manually."
"One thing which can be really helpful is that there is some kind of a recorder made available rather than scripting everything."
"There is always a concern about the amount of code that is required to enhance the automation process. The idea of having less code or no code is what we would like to see in future updates."
"Sometimes, the code is not generated when we record the scripts in the backend."
"The product's scalability must be improved."
"The solution can be improved by making it more user-friendly, and by including autocorrelation capability."
"The TruClient protocol works well but it takes a lot of memory to run those tests, which is something that can be improved."
"The solution is a very expensive tool when compared with other tools."
"It would be good if we could look forward at the future technology needs we have. I would like to see Micro Focus provide more customer awareness around how LoadRunner can fulfill requirements with Big Data use cases, for example, where you do performance testing at the scale of data lakes... when it comes to technologies our company has yet to adopt, I would like to see an indication from Micro Focus of how one does performance testing and what kinds of challenges can we foresee. Those kinds of studies would really help us."
"The process of upgrading LoadRunner can be difficult and time-consuming."
"I believe the data that demonstrates the automated correlations should be corrected."
More OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise Pricing and Cost Advice →
Appium is ranked 7th in Mobile Development Platforms with 25 reviews while OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is ranked 5th in Performance Testing Tools with 81 reviews. Appium is rated 8.0, while OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Appium writes "It's easy to launch applications". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise writes "Saves time and effort, and makes it easy to set up scenarios and execute tests". Appium is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, Perfecto, Xamarin Platform and Apache JMeter, whereas OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise is most compared with OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, OpenText Silk Performer, Tricentis NeoLoad and Apache JMeter.
We monitor all Mobile Development Platforms 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.
