OpenText Functional Testing and Visual Studio Test Professional are prominent competitors in the test automation tool category. OpenText appears to have the upper hand due to its broad compatibility and versatility, appealing to users testing across various technologies and platforms.
Features: OpenText Functional Testing supports a wide range of technologies including desktop, mobile, and web applications. It offers extensive database and API testing capabilities across multiple browsers. Visual Studio Test Professional is known for its code development features, strong integration with Microsoft tools, and support for .NET environments, making it ideal for code-based testing and appealing to developer-centric teams.
Room for Improvement: OpenText Functional Testing needs improvements in speed and memory usage, as it can be resource-intensive on virtual servers. Users also request better cross-browser compatibility and support for more programming languages. Visual Studio Test Professional's Git integration could be improved, with suggestions to simplify its interface and enhance error reporting and stability. Further integration with continuous integration tools is also desired.
Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText is primarily on-premises with some private cloud usage. Customer service is generally good, although it can vary with complex issues sometimes delayed. Visual Studio Test Professional provides flexible deployment, including hybrid cloud setups, and generally prompt customer service, although complex issues can be challenging to resolve efficiently.
Pricing and ROI: OpenText Functional Testing is expensive with a complex licensing model, but its broad technology support can justify the cost by reducing manual testing and increasing test coverage, leading to positive ROI. Visual Studio Test Professional offers various licensing options, including a free community edition, making it accessible and cost-effective for .NET-centric teams, enhancing development processes and offering a good ROI.
The development time using UFT can be cut down into half as compared to coding from scratch.
Automation is done very fast, leading to improvements in the QA process and reducing the time needed for test automation.
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.
Support cases are easily created and attended to promptly, depending on urgency.
The technical support is rated eight out of ten.
Sometimes, the documentation is not readable, being too long or too detailed and not connected to my problem.
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.
The tool can be installed on all computers used by developers or test automation engineers.
One of the key stability issues was that Windows would consume memory without releasing it, leading to regression testing crashes.
Incorporating behavior-driven development tests would enhance the capabilities of UFT One.
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.
The product needs contextual help integrated within its interface.
Sometimes, the library version is not compatible with other libraries, causing errors in my application.
Additionally, in Visual Studio Code, we have an agent mode for GitHub Copilot, which is very helpful in testing or development phases, while Visual Studio's GitHub Copilot is a bit tricky and sometimes does not provide my desired output.
There are many open-source tools with no cost, and there are no-code tools that are less expensive than UFT.
The pricing or licensing policy of OpenText is a bit expensive, however, it's one of the best solutions in the market.
It's cheaper than Tricentis Tosca but more expensive than some others.
The price is expensive.
UFT supports Oracle, SAP, PeopleSoft, and other non-web applications, making automation feasible.
OpenText Functional Testing has an impressive ability to connect to mobile devices and its ability to test so many different types of software, whether it be mainframe, APIs, mobile, web, or desktop.
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.
Visual Studio Test Professional is highly valuable because it provides extensive extensions and plugins that assist in measuring code quality.
We have a retrospective in our auto projects that we are using frequently to get lessons learned, what went well, and what is going wrong.
It supports cross-platform functionality.
| Product | Mindshare (%) |
|---|---|
| OpenText Functional Testing | 6.8% |
| Visual Studio Test Professional | 2.0% |
| Other | 91.2% |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 20 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 13 |
| Large Enterprise | 71 |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 15 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 14 |
| Large Enterprise | 24 |
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.
Visual Studio Test Professional offers sophisticated testing capabilities with a focus on integration with Azure DevOps. Supporting software development, it aids in application creation, lifecycle management, and testing, accommodating a wide array of programming languages.
Visual Studio Test Professional delivers robust features essential for software developers, including seamless integration with C# and .NET projects and extensive customization options. The platform's robust debugging, unit testing, and memory analysis help streamline the development process. Its intuitive interface and integration with tools like IntelliSense and NuGet package manager enhance productivity, alongside its collaboration capabilities with Azure DevOps. While beneficial, it faces challenges such as integration issues with CI tools, high technical skill requirements, and concerns about pricing and stability. Refinements in user interface design, platform compatibility, and support for AI and machine learning technologies remain necessary.
What are the most important features of Visual Studio Test Professional?Visual Studio Test Professional finds its application in software development and automation testing industries, where technical teams use it to create and manage applications across multiple environments. It supports test-driven development, ensuring secure and functional project outputs, and aids in the integration of DevOps practices, enhancing collaborative efforts in software solutions creation.
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.
