"IBM Rational Functional Tester is very contextual."
"The major thing it has helped with is to reduce the workload on testing activities."
"A good automation tool that supports SAP functional testing."
"Scripting is the most valuable. We are able to record and then go in and modify the script that it creates. It has a lot of generative scripts."
"They need to do a complete revamp so that even a non-technical person can manage the tool."
"Could be more user-friendly on the installation and configuration side."
"The support for automation with iOS applications can be better."
"We moved to Ranorex because the solution did not easily scale, and we could not find good and short term third-party help. We needed to have a bigger pool of third-party contractors that we could draw on for specific implementations. Silk didn't have that, and we found what we needed for Ranorex here in the Houston area. It would be good if there is more community support. I don't know if Silk runs a user conference once a year and how they set up partners. We need to be able to talk to somebody more than just on the phone. It really comes right down to that. The generated automated script was highly dependent upon screen position and other keys that were not as robust as we wanted. We found the automated script generated by Ranorex and the other key information about a specific data point to be more robust. It handled the transition better when we moved from computer to computer and from one size of the application to the other size. When we restarted Silk, we typically had to recalibrate screen elements within the script. Ranorex also has some of these same issues, but when we restart, it typically is faster, which is important."
IBM Rational Functional Tester is ranked 25th in Functional Testing Tools with 1 review while Silk Test is ranked 18th in Functional Testing Tools with 3 reviews. IBM Rational Functional Tester is rated 5.0, while Silk Test is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of IBM Rational Functional Tester writes "A highly compatible solution; lacks modernity". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Silk Test writes "An easy to use interface with a recording feature that our business users are happy with". IBM Rational Functional Tester is most compared with Selenium HQ, Micro Focus UFT One, Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio and SmartBear TestComplete, whereas Silk Test is most compared with Micro Focus UFT One, Selenium HQ, Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional, Apache JMeter and Eggplant Digital Automation Intelligence.
See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors and best Regression 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.
