We performed a comparison between Digital.ai Continuous Testing and OpenText UFT Developer based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Katalon Studio and others in Test Automation Tools."The most valuable part of Experitest is the number of real devices on which the test is run."
"Experitest is one of the only companies to offer a real device on the cloud to perform testing. They also provide quality documentations that help you navigate and maximize the solution."
"The most valuable feature for me is the number of protocols that can be tested. It not only tests Web, but also SAP, Siebel, .Net, and even pdf."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the number of plugins for object recognition. The predefined libraries allow us to automate tasks."
"The cost is the most important factor in this tool."
"The most valuable feature is the Object Model, where you can directly pull up the object as a global or a local."
"This tool is really good. We don't need to write any code, but it writes the code itself, only record and play. And it is simple, and it is not heavy; I mean, it doesn't have a large footprint, and it works well for us."
"There are many good things. Like it is intuitive and scripting was easy. Plus the availability of experienced resources in India due to its market leadership."
"The recording feature is quite good as it helps us to find out how things are working."
"The most valuable features are the object repository."
"I have been automating tests for many years on many things but not on mobile devices. The amount of time that I have spent on just figuring out how to use Experitest and get it to work was quite long compared to what I have been doing before. I spent the first two weeks just getting it started. It would be good to have some video explanation of how to use it on your devices and get started. Their online documentation is quite good and extensive, but it would be quite good to have some end-to-end examples demonstrated."
"I would also like to see more videos and descriptions that could make installation more efficient."
"It's now too heavy and they should be making it faster. We do an attempt at automatic regression testing. We schedule a test to start at a certain time. It takes a lot of time to download the resources and start UFT. Competitors in this area have tools that start faster and run the test faster. For example, if the test at our side will take 10 minutes, another tool will do that in one minute."
"The support from Micro Focus needs a lot of improvement."
"The parallel execution of the tests needs improvement. When we are running tests in LeanFT, there are some limitations in terms of running the same tests simultaneously across different browsers. If I'm running a test, let's say to log in, I should be able to execute it through IE, through Microsoft Edge, through Chrome, through Mozilla, etc. This capability doesn't exist in LeanFT. Parallel execution of the test cases across different browsers need to be added."
"I have to keep the remote machine open while the tests are running, otherwise, it leads to instability."
"The support for .NET Framework and Visual Studio in Micro Focus UFT Developer is currently limited. At present, only Visual Studio 2019 is supported, despite the release of a newer version (2022). Similarly, the tool only supports up to .NET Framework version 4.3.8, while there have been six newer versions released. This is an area that could be improved upon, particularly in the Windows environment."
"UFT is like a flagship of testing tools, but it's too expensive and people are not using it so much. They should work on their pricing to make themselves more competitive."
"In the next release, I would like to see the connectivity improved to be less complex and more stable."
"Object definition and recognition need improvement, especially with calendar controls. I faced challenges with schedulers and calendars."
More Digital.ai Continuous Testing Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Digital.ai Continuous Testing is ranked 28th in Test Automation Tools while OpenText UFT Developer is ranked 15th in Test Automation Tools with 34 reviews. Digital.ai Continuous Testing is rated 6.6, while OpenText UFT Developer is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of Digital.ai Continuous Testing writes "Useful for running tests on many different types of real devices but requires some end-to-end video examples to get started quickly". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText UFT Developer writes "Integrates well, has LeanFT library, and good object detection ". Digital.ai Continuous Testing is most compared with Perfecto, Tricentis Tosca, LambdaTest, Sauce Labs and Katalon Studio, whereas OpenText UFT Developer is most compared with OpenText UFT One, Tricentis Tosca, OpenText Silk Test, froglogic Squish and Original Software TestDrive.
See our list of best Test Automation Tools vendors.
We monitor all Test Automation 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.
