We performed a comparison between OpenText Silk Test, OpenText UFT One, and ReadyAPI Test based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Perforce and others in Functional Testing Tools.
"The scalability of the solution is quite good. You can easily expand the product if you need to."
"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."
"The statistics that are available are very good."
"The ability to develop scripts in Visual Studio, Visual Studio integration, is the most valuable feature."
"The feature I like most is the ease of reporting."
"The major thing it has helped with is to reduce the workload on testing activities."
"I like the Help feature in UFT One. For example, if you are navigating a particular window, where there are different options. One wouldn’t know the purpose of every option, but there is no need to search because that window contains a Help button. If you click on that Help button, it directly navigates to the respective help needed. VBScript is very easy to understand and easy to prepare scripts with minimal learning curve."
"I like the fact that we can use LeanFT with our UFT licenses as well."
"The high-level security, high standard and compatible SAP are great."
"The most valuable feature is that it is fast during test execution, unlike LoadRunner."
"The shared repositories can be used throughout all testing which makes jobs easier."
"The initial setup is relatively easy."
"Micro Focus UFT One is a great tool and can be used in a variety of ways."
"It is a stable solution."
"API mockups, functional testing, and load testing are valuable features."
"The most valuable features are that it is user-friendly, it's easy to use and easy to teach to others."
"The utmost importance lies in the performance of the application."
"The solution scales well."
"SoapUI is uncomplicated and user-friendly."
"It's a very simple solution to use."
"The interface is user-friendly."
"Using SoapUI's automation suites to run all our test cases saved us a lot of time. Running 300 test cases takes about three to four days. When you automate all that, it takes only two to three hours."
"The support for automation with iOS applications can be better."
"Could be more user-friendly on the installation and configuration side."
"The pricing is an issue, the program is very expensive. That is something that can improve."
"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."
"The solution has a lack of compatibility with newer technologies."
"They should extend some of the functions that are a bit clunky and improve the integration."
"Everything is very manual. It's up to us to find out exactly what the issues are."
"You have to deal with issues such as the firewall and how can the tool talk with the application, i.e., if the application is on a company network and so on. That, of course, is important to figure out."
"Scripting has become more complex from a maintenance standpoint to support additional browsers."
"I would want to see a significant improvement in the tool's features. The most significant enhancements are support for panel execution and integration with DevSecOps."
"Micro Focus UFT One could benefit from creating modules that are more accessible to non-technical users. Without a developer background or at least basic knowledge of VBScript, using Micro Focus UFT One may not be feasible for everyone. This is something that Micro Focus, now owned by OpenText, should consider in order to cater to business professionals as well. While Micro Focus UFT One does have a recording function, it still requires a certain level of IT proficiency to create effective automation, which may be challenging for those outside of the technical field."
"Micro Focus UFT One could improve by having more maintenance. Every time when we run the solution and develop something, the next time when we run it it doesn't recognize the object. I have to redesign the object again and then run the solution. It's really a headache, it's not consistent."
"We'd like it to have less scripting."
"One area for improvement is its occasional slowness."
"I would like Micro Focus to provide more information on their portal about their newer products. The information about UFT One was outdated. The image recognition features could also be better."
"SoapUI Pro is a little heavy due to the number of features. Previously it was not that heavy. Now the tool is too heavy, they should work on fixing this issue because until your system has lots of resources, you won't be able to use it seamlessly. The performance of the application itself could improve."
"The current interface is unsatisfactory."
"SoapUI would benefit from some more customization abilities. It's a good interface, but it would be nice if they added the ability to build custom dashboards where the user can do their own bar graphs and pie charts."
"It is limited to scope and risk services only. It does have some support for JMS, but it is not out-of-the-box; you have to do some tweaks here and there."
"There are no bugs or glitches, but a few features available only in the Pro version could be made available in the open-source version. Some of the features do not necessarily need to be only available to Pro users. The data generator would be really useful for the open-source version users."
"I would like more documentation, training, tutorials, etc. Also, I don't particularly appreciate that I have to save everything. It takes up a lot of space on my laptop, but I have to install the WSDL again If I don't save it."
"If the load and bare minimum could be defined, I would give this solution a higher rating."
"SoapUI Pro could improve by having dashboards."
Earn 20 points
