We performed a comparison between Eggplant Test and Ranorex Studio based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Test Automation Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."GUI testing is the strength of the tool. The tool works as expected, and the support response from eggPlant, as a company, has been quick and substantial."
"The most valuable features would be the image recognition and the OCR."
"It is easy to set up."
"Its scalability is good. It is useful for desktop applications, and it also uses OCR and does image recognition."
"Good text reading ability."
"The features that we like the most are the developer interface and the ability to quickly develop and deploy tests."
"It provides very strong cross-platform support."
"Everything is happening on the layout or display that is used by the user. Eggplant prompts processes, like 'click here,' or 'look for this image.' Eggplant makes it possible for QA people and BAs, working in the actual display, to check if the software is providing the right images, the right text, and the right results. They don't have to go inside the code or to the TCP/IP layer. Everything is happening at the highest level."
"The most valuable feature of Ranorex Studio is its user-friendly interface."
"I'm from a UFT background, so Ranorex Studio has a similar feel in terms of how it handles objects. It just felt familiar even though I'd never seen it before. However, it doesn't have all the bells and whistles of UFT, but it's a pretty good start, and it's cost-effective."
"The solution is intuitive and pretty self-sustaining. You don't need a lot of help with it in terms of setup or assistance."
"I like the recording function and Ranorex Spy."
"Support is very quick. You can write to them and on the same day, they will respond. This is one of the best features."
"The solutions's regression testing is very important for our company, as is the continuous integration process."
"This is a powerful, reliable and versatile all-around application testing suite."
"The solution is fast and includes built-in libraries that record and playback."
"Eggplant Test should emphasize on improving its offering in non-Windows environments."
"Eggplant Digital Automation Intelligence could improve by lowering the price."
"Its performance and stability could be better."
"In terms of additional features, it would be helpful to have one package for all testing. You have the manager, the AI, then you have functional, and about 10 different packages for installing."
"We found that we had issues regarding the VPN setup, which is one of the reasons that we did not purchase this solution."
"It has low productivity."
"The IDE could be even more full-featured. Because I was a developer, I was very spoiled by either Visual Studio Code or Visual Studio for shortcuts. For example, I was able to say "ctor" and hit Tab and it would create a template of a constructor for me... It would be great, when I want to create a new function, if there were shortcut commands like those that helped create all of the functions, or if there were shortcut features to do any of the complex plans."
"I would like to see standardized actions already built into Eggplant. For example, "wait eight seconds". That way, I wouldn't need to create it as an action. Right now, I have to program that wait and describe it as an action so that everybody knows it is an action that waits eight seconds... That way, somebody who is not familiar with programming processes like "if-else", or "for", or "while", would be able, from the first moment, and without programming, to put some easy-to-use, standardized, actions in place."
"The solution's technical support team could be responsive."
"I'd like to know their testing strategies and to know what they can automate and what they can't. It can become pretty frustrating if you're trying to automate something that changes on a monthly or weekly basis."
"I would like to be able to customize the data grids. They are currently written in Visual Basic and we are unable to get down to the cell level without hard-code."
"Ranorex is used in Windows while other solutions, for example, Katalon Studio, are cross-platform. (But in my opinion, overall, Ranorex is better)."
"We are mainly working for manufacturing OEMs but the integration is not available. It would be a benefit if they built one integration tool for all the Teamcenter home servers and software as the main PLM data source. It is a simple process at this time, the integration could be made easier."
"Part of the challenge is that Ranorex's support is over in Europe, so we can't get responses on the same day. If we had support in the United States that was a bit more timely, that would be helpful."
"Other OS Support, Ranorex Spy performance improvement (Especially for Silverlight controls)."
"The solution does not support dual or regression testing."
Eggplant Test is ranked 12th in Test Automation Tools with 16 reviews while Ranorex Studio is ranked 9th in Test Automation Tools with 46 reviews. Eggplant Test is rated 7.8, while Ranorex Studio is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Eggplant Test writes "Empowers effective test automation with comprehensive platform coverage and scalability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Ranorex Studio writes "Good data security, allowing local installations to prevent data from going to the internet". Eggplant Test is most compared with Selenium HQ, Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, SmartBear TestComplete and Sauce Labs, whereas Ranorex Studio is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, SmartBear TestComplete, froglogic Squish and Telerik Test Studio. See our Eggplant Test vs. Ranorex Studio report.
See our list of best Test Automation Tools vendors and best Regression Testing 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.