OpenText Functional Testing and BlazeMeter are strong contenders in the software testing industry, focusing on automation and performance testing respectively. BlazeMeter appears to have the upper hand due to its modern cloud-based capabilities and easier scalability for performance testing.
Features: OpenText Functional Testing supports a wide array of platforms and technologies including SAP, Oracle, and API testing, offering strong automation frameworks known for versatility. BlazeMeter provides performance and load testing, extensive support for JMeter, and cloud-based load generation, suitable for testing scalability and performance.
Room for Improvement: OpenText Functional Testing faces challenges with high memory usage, occasional slowness, a steep learning curve, and object recognition, along with compatibility issues with browsers and scripting languages. BlazeMeter struggles with integrating automation scripts, reporting capabilities, and performance issues during test execution. Users also seek better support, documentation, and more granular access control features.
Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText Functional Testing is mainly used in on-premises settings, making it complex and resource-intensive, with customer service noted as being slow but helpful when escalations are needed. BlazeMeter works efficiently in both public and hybrid clouds, offering flexible deployment and receiving praise for prompt customer service, often supported by third-party vendors.
Pricing and ROI: OpenText Functional Testing is considered expensive with licensing complexities but offers high ROI due to its broad testing capabilities, especially for legacy systems. BlazeMeter is more affordable, especially for performance testing, with flexible pricing options and a solid ROI through scalability and ease of use in load testing scenarios.
The development time using UFT can be cut down into half as compared to coding from scratch.
Automation is done very fast, leading to improvements in the QA process and reducing the time needed for test automation.
We can easily achieve a return on investment in one, two, or three years.
The customer service is not available 24/7, which affects its rating.
Organizations can't wait for this lengthy process, especially when they are under pressure with their timelines.
Support cases are easily created and attended to promptly, depending on urgency.
The technical support is rated eight out of ten.
BlazeMeter has the capability to simulate a higher number of users compared to JMeter standalone.
BlazeMeter is quite scalable, and I rate its scalability as nine out of ten.
The tool can be installed on all computers used by developers or test automation engineers.
I would rate the stability of BlazeMeter as eight out of ten, indicating that it is a stable and reliable solution.
One of the key stability issues was that Windows would consume memory without releasing it, leading to regression testing crashes.
The extra CSV random dataset plugin could be integrated with a simple checkbox in the existing CSV dataset plugin to read files randomly.
The licensing cost is also a concern since BlazeMeter is not free like JMeter, which limits its use.
We frequently encountered stability issues when the browser dependency caused Windows to consume memory without releasing it, leading to crashes during regression testing.
If it could move closer to a no-code or low-code solution, it might dominate the market again.
Incorporating behavior-driven development tests would enhance the capabilities of UFT One.
BlazeMeter requires licensing, which means it is not free like JMeter, adding to the setup cost considerations.
There are many open-source tools with no cost, and there are no-code tools that are less expensive than UFT.
It's cheaper than Tricentis Tosca but more expensive than some others.
The pricing or licensing policy of OpenText is a bit expensive, however, it's one of the best solutions in the market.
BlazeMeter integrates with JMeter via multiple plugins, which streamlines performance testing, test monitoring, and report sharing.
BlazeMeter offers a higher limit on load simulation compared to standalone JMeter.
UFT supports Oracle, SAP, PeopleSoft, and other non-web applications, making automation feasible.
OpenText UFT One offered valuable features by allowing us to build up libraries to streamline repetitive tasks, making scripting much easier.
The object repository is one of the best in the market, allowing creation of a repository useful for all tests.
BlazeMeter ensures delivery of high-performance software by enabling DevOps teams to quickly and easily run open-source-based performance tests against any mobile app, website or API at massive scale to validate performance at every stage of software delivery.
The rapidly growing BlazeMeter community has more than 100,000 developers and includes prominent global brands such as Adobe, Atlassian, Gap, NBC Universal, Pfizer and Walmart as customers. Founded in 2011, the company is headquartered in Palo Alto, Calif., with its research and development in Tel Aviv.
OpenText Functional Testing provides automated testing with compatibility across technologies, browsers, and platforms. It targets APIs, GUIs, and applications like SAP and Oracle for efficient test automation, emphasizing usability and integration with tools such as Jenkins and ALM.
OpenText Functional Testing offers wide-ranging automation capabilities for functional and regression testing, API testing, and automation across web, desktop, and mainframe applications. It supports script recording and object identification, appealing to less technical users. Despite its advantages, it grapples with memory issues, stability concerns, and a challenging scripting environment. Its VBScript reliance limits flexibility, generating demand for enhanced language support and speed improvement. Users appreciate its role in continuous integration and deployment processes, managing test data efficiently, and reducing manual testing efforts.
What are the key features of OpenText Functional Testing?In industries like finance and healthcare, OpenText Functional Testing is leveraged for end-to-end automation, ensuring streamlined processes and accuracy in testing. Many companies utilize it for efficient test data management and integrating testing within continuous integration/deployment operations.
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.
