BrowserStack vs OpenText UFT Digital Lab comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
BrowserStack Logo
8,712 views|6,797 comparisons
100% willing to recommend
OpenText Logo
778 views|531 comparisons
81% willing to recommend
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between BrowserStack and OpenText UFT Digital Lab based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Functional Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
To learn more, read our detailed BrowserStack vs. OpenText UFT Digital Lab Report (Updated: March 2024).
767,667 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
"BrowserStack's best feature is browser testing across different platforms, including mobile.""Testing across devices and browsers without maintaining that inventory is invaluable.""The main core concept behind this product is, it takes the overhead of maintaining all of your devices or particular computers. It continuously adds the latest devices that are coming into the market.""The most valuable features are the variety of tools available.""The integration is very good.""The product guides and resources are extensive and very helpful.""The most valuable feature is the variety the solution offers around the different types of devices, especially mobile devices.""I've worked on testing integrations with BrowserStack, particularly with a platform called IT. This involves testing the registration process, including receiving verification codes on devices and phones. BrowserStack has been excellent for testing these integrations, providing a seamless workflow development experience."

More BrowserStack Pros →

"There are numerous valuable features such as automation, the ones that facilitate importing and synchronization capabilities between our platform, Jira, and Azure DevOps.""It is a complete solution for mobile application testing.""For automation testing, the tool provides the record and playback option, which helps with object detection easily.""The most valuable feature of this solution is virtualization.""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 product is easy to use.""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."

More OpenText UFT Digital Lab Pros →

Cons
"We had some execution issues.""Occasionally, there are disruptions in the connection which can interfere with our testing processes, especially when testing on phones.""If you are inactive for 30 minutes, the solution will close.""One of the biggest issues with BrowserStack is that if you don't have your network set up by the book, it's hard to get it to work with local desk machines.""Sometimes BrowserStack is really slow and devices are not loading. it is really annoying and that's why we bought several newer devices because sometimes it's affecting us a lot.""BrowserStack operates at a slow pace, it could improve by making it faster.""I would like for there to be more integration with BrowserStack and other platforms.""I would like to see clearer visibility."

More BrowserStack Cons →

"The product's object detection method needs to be improved since it can help testers do perfect testing.""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.""I would like to see more integration with automation tools.""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.""They should introduce a pay-per-use subscription model.""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.""The documentation and user interface both need improvement."

More OpenText UFT Digital Lab Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "This solution costs less than competing products."
  • "The price is fine."
  • "There are different licenses available that can be customized. You can select the features that you want only to use which can be a cost-benefit."
  • "BrowserStack could have a better price, but good things have a price."
  • "The price of BrowserStack is high."
  • "Compared to other solutions, BrowserStack is one of the cheapest."
  • "My company found the product's license to be very compatible with our budget, and we pay 5,000 to 10,000 per year for licenses."
  • "As for pricing, I can't provide a clear evaluation as I'm not directly involved in those discussions."
  • More BrowserStack Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "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."
  • More OpenText UFT Digital Lab Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
    767,667 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:With respect to pricing, they are a bit expensive. I would rate the licensing model a six out of ten, where one is expensive, and ten is cheap. So, the price could be a bit decreased.
    Top Answer:The issue with the product stems from the fact that when we try to do a single or multiple login on multiple browsers for simulation in scenarios where users use Chrome, Mozilla, and Edge, all… more »
    Top Answer:There are numerous valuable features such as automation, the ones that facilitate importing and synchronization capabilities between our platform, Jira, and Azure DevOps.
    Top Answer:I believe there's always room for improvement in various aspects. For the most part, the key challenge is ensuring that customers fully utilize the product as intended and adopt the appropriate… more »
    Top Answer:There are various use cases, each tailored to the specific needs of our customers. When we consider Application Lifecycle Management (ALM), the use case significantly differs from Unified Functional… more »
    Ranking
    5th
    Views
    8,712
    Comparisons
    6,797
    Reviews
    12
    Average Words per Review
    353
    Rating
    7.9
    20th
    Views
    778
    Comparisons
    531
    Reviews
    2
    Average Words per Review
    470
    Rating
    8.5
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Micro Focus UFT Digital Lab, Micro Focus UFT Mobile, Mobile Center, Micro Focus Mobile Center, HPE Mobile Center
    Learn More
    Overview
    BrowserStack is a cloud-based cross-browser testing tool that enables developers to test their websites across various browserson different operating systems and mobile devices, without requiring users to install virtual machines, devices or emulators.
    Our enterprise-level solution is a complete, centralized lab of real mobile devices and emulators. With remote access, developers and testers can develop, debug, test, monitor, and optimize mobile apps from anywhere.
    Sample Customers
    Microsoft, RBS, jQuery, Expedia, Citrix, AIG
    Bci, BPER Services, Die Mobiliar, Harvard Pilgrim Healthcare, HPE, Independent Health, Shanghai OnStar Telematics, Pick n Pay, UCB
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Computer Software Company55%
    Financial Services Firm18%
    Manufacturing Company9%
    Marketing Services Firm9%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company16%
    Financial Services Firm14%
    Manufacturing Company7%
    Retailer7%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm19%
    Computer Software Company17%
    Energy/Utilities Company8%
    Retailer7%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business30%
    Midsize Enterprise26%
    Large Enterprise43%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business18%
    Midsize Enterprise14%
    Large Enterprise67%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business24%
    Midsize Enterprise12%
    Large Enterprise65%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business11%
    Midsize Enterprise10%
    Large Enterprise79%
    Buyer's Guide
    BrowserStack vs. OpenText UFT Digital Lab
    March 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about BrowserStack vs. OpenText UFT Digital Lab and other solutions. Updated: March 2024.
    767,667 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    BrowserStack is ranked 5th in Functional Testing Tools with 25 reviews while OpenText UFT Digital Lab is ranked 20th in Functional Testing Tools with 16 reviews. BrowserStack is rated 8.0, while OpenText UFT Digital Lab is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of BrowserStack writes "Good in the area of automation and offers a high test coverage to users". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText UFT Digital Lab writes "Robust solution for application lifecycle management with numerous valuable features". BrowserStack is most compared with LambdaTest, Sauce Labs, Perfecto, CrossBrowserTesting and Bitbar, whereas OpenText UFT Digital Lab is most compared with OpenText UFT One, Appium, Perfecto, AWS Device Farm and Sauce Labs. See our BrowserStack vs. OpenText UFT Digital Lab report.

    See our list of best Functional 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.