Bitbar vs OpenText Silk Test comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
SmartBear Logo
1,614 views|1,185 comparisons
OpenText Logo
1,767 views|1,205 comparisons
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Bitbar and OpenText Silk Test based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Perforce and others in Functional Testing Tools.
To learn more, read our detailed Functional Testing Tools Report (Updated: March 2024).
765,234 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"Game testing and the API for apps are good.""Ability to use different frameworks."

More Bitbar Pros →

"The scalability of the solution is quite good. You can easily expand the product if you need to.""The feature I like most is the ease of reporting.""The statistics that are available are very good.""The ability to develop scripts in Visual Studio, Visual Studio integration, is the most valuable feature.""Scripting is the most valuable. We are able to record and then go in and modify the script that it creates. It has a lot of generative scripts.""The major thing it has helped with is to reduce the workload on testing activities.""A good automation tool that supports SAP functional testing."

More OpenText Silk Test Pros →

Cons
"Their pricing structure is complicated and can be improved.""Lacking capability options that can be directly integrated."

More Bitbar Cons →

"We moved to Ranorex because the solution did not easily scale, and we could not find good and short term third-party help. We needed to have a bigger pool of third-party contractors that we could draw on for specific implementations. Silk didn't have that, and we found what we needed for Ranorex here in the Houston area. It would be good if there is more community support. I don't know if Silk runs a user conference once a year and how they set up partners. We need to be able to talk to somebody more than just on the phone. It really comes right down to that. The generated automated script was highly dependent upon screen position and other keys that were not as robust as we wanted. We found the automated script generated by Ranorex and the other key information about a specific data point to be more robust. It handled the transition better when we moved from computer to computer and from one size of the application to the other size. When we restarted Silk, we typically had to recalibrate screen elements within the script. Ranorex also has some of these same issues, but when we restart, it typically is faster, which is important.""Could be more user-friendly on the installation and configuration side.""They should extend some of the functions that are a bit clunky and improve the integration.""The support for automation with iOS applications can be better.""Everything is very manual. It's up to us to find out exactly what the issues are.""The pricing is an issue, the program is very expensive. That is something that can improve.""The solution has a lack of compatibility with newer technologies."

More OpenText Silk Test Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "The pricing is complicated. It's in the middle."
  • More Bitbar Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "Our licensing fees are on a yearly basis, and while I think that the price is quite reasonable I am not allowed to share those details."
  • "We paid annually. There is a purchase cost, and then there is an ongoing maintenance fee."
  • More OpenText Silk Test Pricing and Cost Advice →

    Ranking
    26th
    Views
    1,614
    Comparisons
    1,185
    Reviews
    0
    Average Words per Review
    0
    Rating
    N/A
    25th
    Views
    1,767
    Comparisons
    1,205
    Reviews
    0
    Average Words per Review
    0
    Rating
    N/A
    Buyer's Guide
    Functional Testing Tools
    March 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Perforce and others in Functional Testing Tools. Updated: March 2024.
    765,234 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Testdroid
    Segue, SilkTest, Micro Focus Silk Test
    Learn More
    Overview
    Testdroid is a set of mobile software development and testing products by Bitbar Technologies Limited. Testdroid comprises three different products: Testdroid Cloud, Testdroid Recorder and Testdroid Enterprise. Testdroid provides an application programming interface through open source software available on GitHub. Testdroid can use testing frameworks, such as Robotium, Appium and uiautomator for native and Selenium for web applications, targeted for mobile application and game developers. Testdroid Cloud contains real Android and iOS powered devices, some of which are available for users. Testdroid Cloud lets users run tests simultaneously on cloud-based service. Testdroid Recorder is a tool for developers and testers for recording user-actions and producing JUnit based test cases on mobile application and games. Testdroid Recorder is available at the Eclipse marketplace. Testdroid Enterprise is a server software for managing automated testing on multiple real Android and iOS powered devices, supporting Gradle build system and Jenkins Continuous Integration.
    SilkTest is robust and portable test automation for web, native, and enterprise software applications. Silk Test's portability enables users to test applications more effectively with lower complexity and cost in comparison to other functional testing tools on the market. Silk Test's role based testing enables business stakeholders, QA engineers, and developers to contribute to the whole automation testing process, which drives collaboration and increases the effectiveness of software testing.
    Sample Customers
    Rovio, Paf, Supercell, NITRO Games, Seriously, AVG, Google, Bosch, Yahoo, Microsoft, Yandex, Mozilla, eBay, PayPal, TESCO, Cisco WebEx, Facebook, LinkedIn, skype, Subway
    Krung Thai Computer Services, Quality Kiosk, MÂȘller, AVG Technologies
    Top Industries
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company18%
    Government10%
    Financial Services Firm9%
    Healthcare Company8%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company20%
    Financial Services Firm15%
    Manufacturing Company9%
    Comms Service Provider6%
    Company Size
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business24%
    Midsize Enterprise14%
    Large Enterprise62%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business20%
    Midsize Enterprise20%
    Large Enterprise60%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business18%
    Midsize Enterprise12%
    Large Enterprise69%
    Buyer's Guide
    Functional Testing Tools
    March 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Perforce and others in Functional Testing Tools. Updated: March 2024.
    765,234 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    Bitbar is ranked 26th in Functional Testing Tools while OpenText Silk Test is ranked 25th in Functional Testing Tools. Bitbar is rated 7.0, while OpenText Silk Test is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Bitbar writes "It's helped me when I've been short of devices and want to test whether the application will work on a specific device or not". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText Silk Test writes "Stable, with good statistics and detailed reporting available". Bitbar is most compared with BrowserStack, SmartBear TestComplete, CrossBrowserTesting, Sauce Labs and LambdaTest, whereas OpenText Silk Test is most compared with Selenium HQ, OpenText UFT One, Apache JMeter, OpenText UFT Developer and SmartBear TestComplete.

    See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors and best Regression Testing Tools vendors.

    We monitor all Functional Testing Tools 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.