IT Central Station is now PeerSpot: Here's why

Micro Focus UFT Developer vs Silk Test comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Featured Review
Buyer's Guide
Micro Focus UFT Developer vs. Silk Test
July 2022
Find out what your peers are saying about Micro Focus UFT Developer vs. Silk Test and other solutions. Updated: July 2022.
610,336 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"The solution is very scalable.""The most valuable features are the object repository.""It is quite stable, and it has got very user-friendly features, which are important in terms of maintaining our scripts from a long-term perspective. It is very stable for desktop-based, UI-based, and mobile applications. Object repositories and other features are also quite good.""Integrates well with other products.""The cost is the most important factor in this tool.""The most valuable feature for UFT is the ability to test a desktop application.""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."

More Micro Focus UFT Developer Pros →

"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."

More Silk Test Pros →

Cons
"Integration with other tools can become a costly exercise.""With Smart Bear products generally, you can have only one instance of the tool running on a machine.""I have to keep the remote machine open while the tests are running, otherwise, it leads to instability.""In the next release, I would like to see integration with different cloud-based tools such as Azure.""In the next release, I would like to see the connectivity improved to be less complex and more stable.""UFT Developer is good, but it requires high-level development skills. Scripting is something that everybody should know to be able to work with this product. Currently, it is very development intensive, and you need to know various scripting languages. It would be good if the development effort could be cut short, and it can be scriptless like Tosca. It will help in more adoption because not every team has people with a software engineering background. If it is scriptless, the analysts who wear multiple hats and come from different backgrounds can also use it in a friendly manner. It is also quite expensive.""The pricing could be improved."

More Micro Focus UFT Developer Cons →

"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.""Could be more user-friendly on the installation and configuration side.""The support for automation with iOS applications can be better."

More Silk Test Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "When we compare in the market with other tools that have similar features, it may be a little bit extra, but the cost is ten times less."
  • "It is cheap, but if you take the enterprise license, it is valid for both software items."
  • "The licensing is very expensive, so often, we don't have enough VMs to run all of our tests."
  • "Its cost is a bit high. From the licensing perspective, I am using a concurrent license. It is not a seed license. It is something that I can use in our network. It can also be used by other users."
  • More Micro Focus UFT Developer Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "Our licensing fees are on a yearly basis, and while I think that the price is quite reasonable I am not allowed to share those details."
  • "We paid annually. There is a purchase cost, and then there is an ongoing maintenance fee."
  • More Silk Test Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
    610,336 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:The issue with all the integration is that it can become very costly and expensive and we'd like to be able to recommend one single tool that will do it all.
    Top Answer: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.
    Top Answer:We paid annually. There is a purchase cost, and then there is an ongoing maintenance fee.
    Top Answer: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… more »
    Ranking
    13th
    Views
    5,051
    Comparisons
    3,494
    Reviews
    7
    Average Words per Review
    644
    Rating
    7.4
    18th
    Views
    3,889
    Comparisons
    2,537
    Reviews
    3
    Average Words per Review
    752
    Rating
    7.7
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    UFT Pro (LeanFT), Micro Focus UFT Pro (LeanFT), LeanFT, HPE LeanFT
    Segue, SilkTest, Micro Focus Silk Test
    Learn More
    Overview

    Micro Focus UFT Pro (LeanFT) is a powerful yet lightweight functional test automation solution, that supports a wide range of AUT technologies. Targeted to technical test automation engineers and developers/testers in Agile teams, Micro Focus UFT Pro (LeanFT) is fully embedded in standard IDEs and integrates naturally with the Dev and QA ecosystems.

    SilkTest is robust and portable test automation for web, native, and enterprise software applications. Silk Test's portability enables users to test applications more effectively with lower complexity and cost in comparison to other functional testing tools on the market. Silk Test's role based testing enables business stakeholders, QA engineers, and developers to contribute to the whole automation testing process, which drives collaboration and increases the effectiveness of software testing.
    Offer
    Learn more about Micro Focus UFT Developer
    Learn more about Silk Test
    Sample Customers
    Walmart, Hitachi, American Airlines, PepsiCo, AT&T, Ericsson, United Airlines
    Krung Thai Computer Services, Quality Kiosk, Mªller, AVG Technologies
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm18%
    Comms Service Provider14%
    Healthcare Company9%
    Computer Software Company9%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company27%
    Financial Services Firm15%
    Comms Service Provider9%
    Insurance Company6%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company29%
    Financial Services Firm13%
    Comms Service Provider12%
    Government7%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business3%
    Midsize Enterprise21%
    Large Enterprise76%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business12%
    Midsize Enterprise12%
    Large Enterprise76%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business20%
    Midsize Enterprise20%
    Large Enterprise60%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business16%
    Midsize Enterprise11%
    Large Enterprise73%
    Buyer's Guide
    Micro Focus UFT Developer vs. Silk Test
    July 2022
    Find out what your peers are saying about Micro Focus UFT Developer vs. Silk Test and other solutions. Updated: July 2022.
    610,336 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    Micro Focus UFT Developer is ranked 13th in Functional Testing Tools with 7 reviews while Silk Test is ranked 18th in Functional Testing Tools with 3 reviews. Micro Focus UFT Developer is rated 7.4, while Silk Test is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Micro Focus UFT Developer writes "Great features with good stability and an easy initial setup". 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". Micro Focus UFT Developer is most compared with Micro Focus UFT One, Tricentis Tosca, Selenium HQ, Visual Studio Test Professional and froglogic Squish, whereas Silk Test is most compared with Micro Focus UFT One, Selenium HQ, Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional, Apache JMeter and SmartBear TestComplete. See our Micro Focus UFT Developer vs. Silk Test report.

    See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors and best Test Automation 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.