Dec 01, 2021
UFT One is the one you need.
OpenText Functional Testing and OpenText Functional Testing for Developers compete in the automation testing market. OpenText Functional Testing has the upper hand due to its extensive compatibility and out-of-the-box functionality, while the Developers version is preferred for its integration capabilities.
Features: OpenText Functional Testing offers high compatibility with various tools, ease of use, and powerful automation frameworks. It supports testing across different environments and technologies. In contrast, OpenText Functional Testing for Developers provides extensive integration options with development tools and allows for coding in multiple languages, aiding developers in streamlining their workflows.
Room for Improvement: OpenText Functional Testing could improve with lower memory usage, better .NET support, and smoother integration with CI/CD pipelines. Enhancing browser compatibility and speed would also be beneficial. The Developers version could benefit from improved object recognition and additional support for modern scripting languages. Users recommend improved integration, particularly with ALM, and expanding the range of supported platforms.
Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Both products can be deployed on-premises and in the cloud. Users report mixed experiences with customer service, ranging from quick and helpful to slow and unhelpful. OpenText Functional Testing entails a more complex setup due to its comprehensive features, whereas the Developers version offers simpler deployment with a focus on technical proficiency.
Pricing and ROI: OpenText Functional Testing is costly but offers a significant ROI for large-scale automation projects by reducing manual testing. The Developers version also incurs high costs, with limited licensing options. OpenText Functional Testing delivers better ROI through its extensive functionality, whereas the Developers version is more cost-effective for enterprises needing enhanced development tool integration.
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.
Initially, it was quite poor, but it seems they are making efforts to improve.
For technical support, I would give them an eight because whenever we have a concern, they immediately reach out to us.
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.
We regularly update the product, and overall, it is stable.
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.
In some cases, object recognition is not 100%, and a customized solution is necessary.
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 of OpenText UFT Developer is a bit higher than expected, but there are no better tools available for a valid comparison.
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.
OpenText UFT Developer is user-friendly and integrates well with Visual Studio.
| Product | Mindshare (%) |
|---|---|
| OpenText Functional Testing | 6.3% |
| OpenText Functional Testing for Developers | 3.1% |
| Other | 90.6% |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 20 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 13 |
| Large Enterprise | 71 |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 2 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 12 |
| Large Enterprise | 29 |
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.
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.
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.
