OpenText Functional Testing for Developers and Qt Squish compete in the functional testing category. OpenText has the upper hand in developer-oriented features and integration capabilities, while Qt Squish stands out in GUI testing and support for Qt frameworks.
Features: OpenText offers extensive customization and integration with ALM and Jenkins, supports multiple languages like C# and Java, and provides multi-platform flexibility. Qt Squish features robust object recognition, cross-platform compatibility, and integrations into CI systems like TeamCity, with a powerful IDE supporting various scripting languages.
Room for Improvement: OpenText could improve by supporting more technologies and enhancing JavaScript integration, stability, parallel execution, cross-browser support, and UI customization. Qt Squish could enhance object identification, simplify test creation, and improve continuous integration and performance testing.
Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText is available on-premises and via the cloud, but support quality varies. Qt Squish is primarily on-premises and praised for excellent technical support, with direct access to developers ensuring timely resolutions.
Pricing and ROI: OpenText's pricing is high, suitable for larger teams, offering a significant return on investment. Qt Squish is perceived as expensive but offers flexible licensing, which can accommodate different needs, showing substantial ROI with extensive use across teams.
For the part that has been automated in Qt, not everything is suitable for automation.
Initially, it was quite poor, but it seems they are making efforts to improve.
With one license, just one user or one test scenario can be run at a time.
We regularly update the product, and overall, it is stable.
In some cases, object recognition is not 100%, and a customized solution is necessary.
If you want to run it for different versions of the software, then you need the Qt version of Java.
The price of OpenText UFT Developer is a bit higher than expected, but there are no better tools available for a valid comparison.
For the developer license, it is about $5200 a year.
OpenText UFT Developer is user-friendly and integrates well with Visual Studio.
For the parts that have been automated in Qt, not everything is suitable for automation.
OpenText Functional Testing for Developers offers robust automation capabilities with support for complex algorithms, multi-platform testing, and developer-friendly integration using C# and Java, facilitating seamless testing transitions and efficient automation workflows.
This testing tool is highly valued for its integration with ALM and Jenkins, along with its developer-focused environment adaptable to Eclipse and Visual Studio. With AI-based object recognition, an object repository, and test framework integration, it bolsters DevOps practices while reducing IT workloads. Supporting UFT to LeanFT transition, it caters to SAP, Java, .NET environments, and more. Enhanced with stable automation, extensive protocol support, and both on-premises and cloud deployments, it targets performance, regression, and functional testing, while recording and screengrabs enhance automation capabilities. Future improvements could include expanded browser compatibility, enhanced JavaScript and mobile support, and better object recognition.
What are the key features of OpenText Functional Testing for Developers?Organizations implement OpenText Functional Testing for complex test automation on desktop, web, and banking applications, supporting performance, regression, and functionality testing across environments like SAP, Java, and .NET. UFT aids in GUI, infrastructure, and ERP application automation, with deployment options including on-premises and cloud implementations. Enhanced screengrabs and recording features aid in practical test case development, while addressing emerging technology needs is a focus.
Take the complexity out of testing graphical user interfaces (GUIs) and human-machine interfaces (HMIs) – even in the face of product evolution and safety-critical applications.
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.
