OpenText UFT Developer and Qt Squish compete in the software test automation category. OpenText UFT Developer holds an advantage due to its support for multiple protocols and technologies, while Qt Squish gains strength from its cross-platform compatibility.
Features: OpenText UFT Developer integrates broadly with various development environments and supports complex test scenarios, making it adaptable for diverse testing needs. It is especially beneficial in environments requiring expansive technology support. Qt Squish shines in cross-platform testing, supporting numerous operating systems, creating a versatile tool for applications deployed across various platforms.
Room for Improvement: OpenText UFT Developer could improve its cross-platform support, making it as flexible as its integration capabilities. Enhancing native support for mobile applications and simplifying customization could also be beneficial. Qt Squish lacks in deep integration with some popular continuous integration tools and could further streamline its scripting languages. Its documentation, though extensive, sometimes lacks depth in specific areas, requiring enhancement to aid new users.
Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenText UFT Developer offers a simplified deployment aided by comprehensive documentation and responsive support, helping with quick implementation and issue resolution. Qt Squish provides flexibility in deployment, but its strength lies in platform support and decent customer service, which helps it adapt to various environments efficiently.
Pricing and ROI: OpenText UFT Developer demands a higher initial setup investment but offers valuable features leading to a good ROI over time. Qt Squish, with competitive pricing and lower initial costs, appeals to smaller projects and delivers an effective ROI in multi-platform testing scenarios, making it a cost-efficient solution for versatile testing needs.
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.
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.
