OpenText Service Virtualization vs ReadyAPI Virtualization comparison

"The support for integration patterns and the ease of use to wizard-based utility is what I would consider the most important features for service virtualization platforms."

"The most valuable feature is SAP virtualization."

"It is easy to use. This is what I tell my customers. The coding is easier to develop as well."

"The feature which is most valuable in this solution is the ease of use. The product is very easy to use and very easy to implement."

"The most valuable feature is that it reduces the dependency so that the down time of the environment is not a major cost. That cost can be used for something else like the cloud."

"Features, such as using Groovy scripts for generating dynamic response, which read data out of Excel sheets and one-click deployment are really nice."

"ServiceV Pro enabled our organization to deliver an end-to-end solution by virtualizing external systems, which was easy to implement and provided for a lot of flexibility."

"The solution is very easy to use."

"Discovery option to create virtual services."

"Ties-in with the rest of the SoapUI platform and its ability to record traffic and create a virtual endpoint."

"In times of DevOps, where continuous delivery and deployment is progressing at such a fast pace, ServiceV Pro has emerged as an add-on for enhancing our API product finish."

"The technical support is good."

"HPE products are good, but they never make a product for a specific use. They make a product for the enterprise because that is their vision. They like multi-generational business plans. That means that they don't deliver small bits and pieces, but rather, they deliver to the enterprise."

"More support for different protocols. I would love to see more wizards rather than relying on some custom coding, which you can use C# as well as Visual Basic scripting. In the service virtualization platform, I would love to see more wizard features as well as the ability to connect to an external database, which by the way, we have put an enhancement request in for. I'd love to see that in the service virtualization platform."

"The current protocol needs to be updated to be much more flexible. The product needs more technical flexibility in implementation and customization."

"The monitoring feature is not impressive because they use Windows for so much monitoring. They set a lock on the window, and then we have to gather the information from the main monitoring feature in the Windows server. There is not enough capacity for problem solving performance issues."

"The integration with other solutions, such as ALM and Jira, should be improved."

"Requires more documentation or videos with examples, which is easily understood by the new users."

"The effort required to utilize the capabilities/usage of ServiceV Pro looks like the one area where we could have some further improvements"

"It needs support for a wider set of protocols."

"The solution does not allow you to export APIs to the cURL command like Postman."

"Greater capacity to create Virtual APIs based on HAR files or wireshark recordings."

"ServiceV still has some bug in the tools, such as structure of the project, integration, and combination with different tools present."

"It's an expensive solution, but you can get discounts. You have to buy one server and one designer together, for example, and it may cost 15 million Thai Baht."

"Micro Service Virtualization is very expensive. The pricing of this product is in line with all of the other big name-brand products."

"Pricing is alright, however more options would be desirable for a fairly new product like ServiceV."

"This product is worth the cost."

"Ability to have general IT staff enable developers using this software as opposed to more expensive vendors or developers building their own solution."

"Be updated with the latest offerings that the tool provides so as to avoid any clashes with issues, like licensing."