We performed a comparison between Broadcom Service Virtualization and OpenText UFT One based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Broadcom, OpenText, SmartBear and others in Service Virtualization."We have had developers produce code later than we wanted to, but we've had some other stuff that was dependent on that. So what we were able to do was virtualize these assets and then go forward with our developer and not have to wait for these additional services to be available."
"Easy to understand ways of creating stubs."
"The ability to create virtual services and deploy them as Docker containers, and include them in our Jenkins build pipelines, is a valuable feature."
"We had a number of back-end services that were not available during testing times. What this had allowed us to do is get our early life testing done while those services are not available."
"The innovation is amazing. CA has continued to add to services that it supports, the transports that it supports, and has built all of the enterprise capabilities into the product as well."
"It's got probably the greatest amount of features, in terms of different technologies that you can automate and virtualize, out of any of the solutions out there."
"It is easy to use, has a faster time to market, and provides flexibility."
"We are able to quickly scale our requests. We have tested across thousands of requests. We have had no problems so far."
"The scalability of Micro Focus UFT One is good."
"The high-level security, high standard and compatible SAP are great."
"For traditional automation, approximately half of our tests end up automated. Therefore, we are saving half the testing time by pushing it off to automation. That gives it an intrinsic benefit of more time for manual testers and business testers to work on possibly more important and interesting things. For some of our applications, they don't just have to do happy path testing anymore, they can go more in-depth and breadth into the process."
"My company has not had an issue with OpenText UFT One since we have been using it for the past three to four years."
"The most valuable feature for me is that it works on multiple platforms and technologies."
"It offers a wide range of testing."
"The entire framework is very useful. It's easily integrable with Excel."
"Compared to other products, UFT One is better, faster, and more accurate."
"I would like to have more flexibility towards the mainframe virtualization and also in JDBC virtualization."
"I'd like to see more of the newer technologies included in there, looking mainly from a mobile perspective, possibly, so you can virtualize some of the aspects that we're going to be doing for mobile testing."
"CA actually releases a new version every year. We had issues with the upgrade prior to the latest one."
"It is not a stable solution."
"One major feature I would like to see is on the user administration part. Right now, anybody can access any of the folders and any of the projects."
"The workstation component has a very out-dated UI and is in dire need of a facelift."
"They can always work on usability and making simple things simple to do. This is true of every product that deals with complexity."
"The cost is an area that needs improvement. There are a couple of other tools which provide support for performance testing with the base version itself, but Broadcom needs a separate component to support virtualization for performance testing. This is a costly component."
"Micro Focus UFT One could benefit from creating modules that are more accessible to non-technical users. Without a developer background or at least basic knowledge of VBScript, using Micro Focus UFT One may not be feasible for everyone. This is something that Micro Focus, now owned by OpenText, should consider in order to cater to business professionals as well. While Micro Focus UFT One does have a recording function, it still requires a certain level of IT proficiency to create effective automation, which may be challenging for those outside of the technical field."
"Object identification has room for improvement, to make it more efficient."
"One thing that confused me, and now just mildly irritates me, is that we migrated from QuickTest Pro to HP UFT, Unified Functional Test. After we did the migration, it turned out that we didn't really have Unified Functional Test at all."
"Scripting has become more complex from a maintenance standpoint to support additional browsers."
"The product wasn't easy for developers to learn and pick up in the area revolving around scripting for automation, and there was a lot of resistance from developers, causing my company to rely on specialist resources."
"The artificial intelligence functionality is applicable only on the web, and it should be expanded to cover non-web applications as well."
"I'd like to see UFT integrated more with some of the open source tools like Selenium, where web is involved."
"Sometimes it appears that UFT takes a while to open and sometimes will run slower than expected. Also, UFT uses a lot of memory. On this note, if you are running UFT on a virtual server I would add more RAM memory than the minimum requirements especially when using multiple add-ins. HP is pretty good about coming out with new patches to fix known issues and it pays for the user to check for new patches and updates on a regular basis."
More Broadcom Service Virtualization Pricing and Cost Advice →
Broadcom Service Virtualization is ranked 1st in Service Virtualization with 97 reviews while OpenText UFT One is ranked 2nd in Functional Testing Tools with 89 reviews. Broadcom Service Virtualization is rated 8.2, while OpenText UFT One is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Broadcom Service Virtualization writes "Feature-rich, easy to configure and set up, and the support is good". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText UFT One writes "With regularly occurring releases, a QA team member can schedule tests, let the tests run unattended, and then examine the results". Broadcom Service Virtualization is most compared with ReadyAPI Test, Parasoft Virtualize, IBM Rational Test Virtualization Server, OpenText Service Virtualization and Tricentis Tosca, whereas OpenText UFT One is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText UFT Developer, Katalon Studio, SmartBear TestComplete and UiPath Test Suite.
We monitor all Service Virtualization 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.
