Dec 01, 2021
UFT One is the one you need.
OpenText Functional Testing and OpenText Functional Testing for Developers are top contenders in the functional testing category. Based on user feedback, OpenText Functional Testing holds an edge due to its comprehensive technology support and advanced automation capabilities, while OpenText Functional Testing for Developers offers robust integration with developer tools, making it a favourite among development teams.
Features: OpenText Functional Testing is known for efficient object identification, advanced automation capabilities, and AI-driven features. Its integration with a wide range of technologies and comprehensive DevOps compatibility make it a versatile tool. OpenText Functional Testing for Developers is popular for its developer-friendly environment, integration with mainstream programming languages like C# and Java, and efficient integration with various developer tools.
Room for Improvement: OpenText Functional Testing could benefit from enhanced browser support and better integration with modern scripting languages. Complex script maintenance and high resource consumption are also areas needing attention. OpenText Functional Testing for Developers could improve by expanding support for more platforms and languages and lowering its licensing costs. Simplifying the user interface further would make it more accessible to non-technical users.
Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Both products mainly see on-premise deployments. For OpenText Functional Testing, customer service is generally responsive, though occasionally slow depending on the issue's complexity and contract levels. Users of OpenText Functional Testing for Developers echo similar experiences, stating that timely responses to complex issues remain a challenge.
Pricing and ROI: OpenText Functional Testing's pricing is deemed high but seen as justified due to its extensive features and technology support. Comparatively, OpenText Functional Testing for Developers has more flexible options for cloud and on-premises deployment, although it can be costly without a free trial. Despite this, both tools are recognized for their potential to deliver significant ROI when implemented effectively.
The development time using UFT can be cut down into half as compared to coding from scratch.
We can easily achieve a return on investment in one, two, or three years.
Organizations can't wait for this lengthy process, especially when they are under pressure with their timelines.
I would rate the support for this product a seven on a scale of one to ten.
The technical support is rated eight out of ten.
Initially, it was quite poor, but it seems they are making efforts to improve.
For technical support, I would give them an eight because whenever we have a concern, they immediately reach out to us.
Running them in parallel allows you to consume multiple runtime licenses and just execute the tests that don't have conflicting priorities and get through a lot of volume much quicker.
One of the key stability issues was that Windows would consume memory without releasing it, leading to regression testing crashes.
We regularly update the product, and overall, it is stable.
We frequently encountered stability issues when the browser dependency caused Windows to consume memory without releasing it, leading to crashes during regression testing.
If it could move closer to a no-code or low-code solution, it might dominate the market again.
Reducing the levels of support is something they could continue to improve.
In some cases, object recognition is not 100%, and a customized solution is necessary.
The pricing or licensing policy of OpenText is a bit expensive, however, it's one of the best solutions in the market.
There are many open-source tools with no cost, and there are no-code tools that are less expensive than UFT.
The price of OpenText UFT Developer is a bit higher than expected, but there are no better tools available for a valid comparison.
UFT supports Oracle, SAP, PeopleSoft, and other non-web applications, making automation feasible.
OpenText UFT One offered valuable features by allowing us to build up libraries to streamline repetitive tasks, making scripting much easier.
The best features of OpenText Functional Testing include descriptive programming, the ability to add objects in the repository, and its ease of use for UI compared to other tools.
OpenText UFT Developer is user-friendly and integrates well with Visual Studio.
| Product | Mindshare (%) |
|---|---|
| OpenText Functional Testing | 8.7% |
| OpenText Functional Testing for Developers | 3.8% |
| Other | 87.5% |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 20 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 13 |
| Large Enterprise | 74 |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 2 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 12 |
| Large Enterprise | 30 |
OpenText Functional Testing is designed for ease of use, featuring strong object identification, AI capabilities, and multi-platform integration. Its VBScript simplicity and cross-browser, mobile support make it versatile for handling UI and API tests.
OpenText Functional Testing provides a seamless testing experience with powerful automation capabilities. Its integration with technologies like SAP and Oracle, combined with record and playback features, makes it a go-to tool for comprehensive testing environments. Users find value in its flexibility to streamline both UI and API tests. Challenges include high costs and resource usage, and there's a demand for broader programming language support and improved integration with CI/CD pipelines. Enhanced AI functionalities and better documentation are also requested.
What are the key features of OpenText Functional Testing?OpenText Functional Testing is utilized in industries requiring robust testing frameworks like finance and healthcare. Companies automate web, desktop, and API applications, perform functional tests, and handle validations. Its adaptability to integration and broad technology support facilitates diverse testing needs.
OpenText Functional Testing for Developers is designed to minimize scripting efforts with its Object Model and robust plugins. Its integration capabilities with ALM and Jenkins, along with support for numerous programming languages, make it ideal for modern development environments.
Featuring seamless integration in development platforms like Eclipse and Visual Studio, OpenText Functional Testing for Developers supports desktop and web application testing with high efficiency. It's equipped to handle multiple programming languages, offering flexibility across platforms and consistent stability. Users benefit from test automation, screengrabbing, and performance testing to simulate real-world scenarios. Integration with tools like LoadRunner and JMeter, and deployment on on-premises and cloud models enhances its utility. While improvements in user experience, pricing, and broader technology support like JavaScript and C# are demanded, the tool remains a comprehensive option for various testing needs.
What are the key features of OpenText Functional Testing for Developers?Industries implementing OpenText Functional Testing for Developers range from banking to ERP systems, where its use in testing ATM applications and performance testing offers significant value. Organizations benefit from the tool's capacity for cross-browser and mobile testing, meeting specific industry needs with adaptive capabilities.
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.
