We performed a comparison between OpenText UFT Developer and Oracle Application Testing Suite based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Functional Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The recording feature is quite good as it helps us to find out how things are working."
"One aspect that I like about Micro Focus UFT Developer is the ability to integrate it into a testing framework as a library."
"The most valuable feature is stability."
"The cost is the most important factor in this tool."
"One of the important features, which speeds up the automation testing development with LeanFT, is its object repository functions. Object identification are the most time-consuming aspect of building automation tests. LeanFT gives that out of the box. It helps you identify the objects and after that, once you got the object in place, then it's just about building the test scripts. So it reduces your development time significantly."
"The most valuable feature for UFT is the ability to test a desktop application."
"The most valuable features are the object repository."
"The most valuable feature is the Object Model, where you can directly pull up the object as a global or a local."
"I like the functional testing. There's a product inside OATS called OLT, Oracle Load Testing. You can do the load testing without depending on any other tool"
"OpenScript has many features that make it useful, including the ability to record and playback."
"The most valuable feature is the object identification feature."
"The solution is scalable."
"We like that we don't need a separate management tool. This is a good feature. It also has an inbuilt performance tool which is on Flash. It has very good record and playback feature as well. The inspection tool is also very good. Overall, since it comes with all the three packages, it's very good."
"We find the front-end interface of this solution to be very user-friendly, meaning easy navigation even for novice users."
"We do not need a separate test management tool because we have there is a management tool. That is a very good feature. Secondly, it has an inbuilt performance testing tool, which is on flash. It has very good record and playback features as well. And apart from that, there is a good inspection feature. Since it comes with all of the packages, it's very good."
"The function test feature is valuable."
"I have to keep the remote machine open while the tests are running, otherwise, it leads to instability."
"Easier connectivity and integration with SAP would be helpful."
"With Smart Bear products generally, you can have only one instance of the tool running on a machine."
"Object definition and recognition need improvement, especially with calendar controls. I faced challenges with schedulers and calendars."
"It's now too heavy and they should be making it faster. We do an attempt at automatic regression testing. We schedule a test to start at a certain time. It takes a lot of time to download the resources and start UFT. Competitors in this area have tools that start faster and run the test faster. For example, if the test at our side will take 10 minutes, another tool will do that in one minute."
"The product has shown no development over the past 10 or 15 years."
"It is unstable, expensive, inflexible, and has poor support."
"The pricing could be improved."
"The dashboards need to be simplified and made more user-friendly."
"It needs to be compatible with all browsers."
"If there's a feature we want in OATS that's missing and we report that to Oracle, it takes a long time."
"I would like to see better dashboards."
"I have faced issues with some indexing items."
"Lacks patches for new OS systems and doesn't work on a Mac."
"The pathfinding at times is slow when we are using it. The tool's performance can be improved."
"To provide test automation support for other products like SAP, Windows and Java Applications when it comes to Functional Test Automation testing."
More Oracle Application Testing Suite Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText UFT Developer is ranked 16th in Functional Testing Tools with 34 reviews while Oracle Application Testing Suite is ranked 13th in Functional Testing Tools with 24 reviews. OpenText UFT Developer is rated 7.4, while Oracle Application Testing Suite is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of OpenText UFT Developer writes "Integrates well, has LeanFT library, and good object detection ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Oracle Application Testing Suite writes "Requires little maintenance, is stable, and easy to deploy". OpenText UFT Developer is most compared with OpenText UFT One, Tricentis Tosca, OpenText Silk Test, froglogic Squish and Original Software TestDrive, whereas Oracle Application Testing Suite is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText UFT One, Katalon Studio, Apache JMeter and OpenText LoadRunner Cloud. See our OpenText UFT Developer vs. Oracle Application Testing Suite report.
See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors.
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.
