![TestProject [EOL] Logo](https://images.peerspot.com/image/upload/c_scale,dpr_3.0,f_auto,q_100,w_64/b4rquyepmczaz73zo6nsgabt38xo.png)
OpenText Functional Testing and TestProject [EOL] compete in the automated testing tools category. OpenText seems to have the upper hand due to its comprehensive integration support and versatility in technology coverage, catering especially to large enterprises with complex needs.
Features: OpenText Functional Testing offers support for a wide range of technologies and browsers, enhancing test automation. It integrates well with ALM for GUI and API testing, making it suitable for large-scale testing scenarios. TestProject [EOL], although praised for its user-friendly and scriptless automation capabilities, was limited in integration support.
Room for Improvement: OpenText Functional Testing could improve on memory usage, stability issues, and a simpler licensing model. Better browser compatibility and integration with CI/CD pipelines are also suggested. TestProject [EOL] struggled with cross-browser compatibility and reliability post-EOL, and needed improvements in reporting clarity and integration support.
Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText provides flexible deployment options, both on-premises and cloud, though some users report slow support. TestProject [EOL], offering on-premises and cloud options, had limited customer support primarily due to its open-source open-source nature before being discontinued.
Pricing and ROI: OpenText is considered costly with complex licensing but delivers significant ROI through productivity and comprehensive test coverage, especially for large setups. TestProject [EOL], initially free and open-source, offered excellent ROI for budget-conscious users despite its EOL status.
![TestProject [EOL] Logo](https://images.peerspot.com/image/upload/c_scale,dpr_3.0,f_auto,q_100,w_40/b4rquyepmczaz73zo6nsgabt38xo.png){kind=small}
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 20 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 12 |
| Large Enterprise | 71 |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 4 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 2 |
| Large Enterprise | 1 |
OpenText Functional Testing provides automated testing with compatibility across technologies, browsers, and platforms. It targets APIs, GUIs, and applications like SAP and Oracle for efficient test automation, emphasizing usability and integration with tools such as Jenkins and ALM.
OpenText Functional Testing offers wide-ranging automation capabilities for functional and regression testing, API testing, and automation across web, desktop, and mainframe applications. It supports script recording and object identification, appealing to less technical users. Despite its advantages, it grapples with memory issues, stability concerns, and a challenging scripting environment. Its VBScript reliance limits flexibility, generating demand for enhanced language support and speed improvement. Users appreciate its role in continuous integration and deployment processes, managing test data efficiently, and reducing manual testing efforts.
What are the key features of OpenText Functional Testing?In industries like finance and healthcare, OpenText Functional Testing is leveraged for end-to-end automation, ensuring streamlined processes and accuracy in testing. Many companies utilize it for efficient test data management and integrating testing within continuous integration/deployment operations.
TestProject is a free end-to-end test automation platform for web, mobile, and API testing that’s supported by the #1 test automation community.
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.
![OpenText Functional Testing vs. TestProject [EOL] report](https://www.peerspot.com/assets/media/images/icons/pdf-80836ec5.svg){kind=icon}
