We performed a comparison between OpenText UFT Developer, ReadyAPI, and Sauce Labs based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Perforce and others in Functional Testing Tools."The most valuable feature for UFT is the ability to test a desktop application."
"The most valuable features are the object repository."
"The recording feature is quite good as it helps us to find out how things are working."
"The most valuable feature of Micro Focus UFT Developer is the flexibility to work with many different types of software."
"The solution is very scalable."
"The most valuable feature is the automation of test cases."
"One aspect that I like about Micro Focus UFT Developer is the ability to integrate it into a testing framework as a library."
"It's a complete pursuit and it's a logical pursuit working with HPE."
"It's easy to implement."
"The dashboards are very good and consolidate all of the tests that you are performing with the client."
"A single platform for functional testing, load testing security, and service actualization."
"For anyone who does not have experience with automation, ReadyAPI provides a sense of comfort, especially for testers who find it hard to go directly into coding."
"The Excel sheet feature is good."
"The great thing about ReadyAPI is that it has a wide variety of functions. You can test any API that you come across. You are not limited to one type of API. It supports many APIs."
"It can create stress tests very fast, and some features help you do it fast."
"The initial setup of ReadyAPI is straightforward."
"They update for the latest browsers and mobile phones and support a lot of combinations. They have 1,000-plus desktop combinations and browser versions, which is really great. We need that at Applause. The all-in-one testing suite aspect of it is really important because most of our clients prefer to go to one place."
"Testing across multiple devices and environments is now possible to do quickly and effectively."
"It provides a comprehensive selection of browsers and platform versions for our test automations and CI/CD pipeline process. It also provides a comprehensive set of virtual mobile devices, which we can configure for our automation and availability. These features are valuable for us when it comes to testing our applications. We have a website and mobile applications that we want to test and diversify to various browsers and mobile devices as well as restore various versions. This helps us to find bugs that users might be facing and correct them."
"Sauce Lab analytics helped us to get detailed knowledge on test cases execution and logs."
"The insights section provides a great overall state of the automation suite and can identify trends relatively quickly. If we see a dip in our passing rate over time, we can look at what changed when the test started failing to find the root cause rather than doing a quick fix to find that the test fails a short time later."
"The solution they provide is very robust. We can quickly connect to their environment with the hub URL. They have a URL that has the entire grid of desktops, web browsers, and mobile devices. They also provide real devices, so you just provide the URL and test your application."
"The most valuable feature is cross-browser, cross-OS, cross-mobile device testing."
"Before implementing Sauce Labs, we tested physical devices that team members had to share. It was more feasible when we were all located in one office, but we couldn't leverage our offshore capacity. With this solution, we can do everything remotely, which is essential now that most of us work from home."
"The parallel execution of the tests needs improvement. When we are running tests in LeanFT, there are some limitations in terms of running the same tests simultaneously across different browsers. If I'm running a test, let's say to log in, I should be able to execute it through IE, through Microsoft Edge, through Chrome, through Mozilla, etc. This capability doesn't exist in LeanFT. Parallel execution of the test cases across different browsers need to be added."
"We push one button and the tests are completely executed at once, so just have to analyze and say it's okay. It would be nice if this could be entirely automated."
"It is unstable, expensive, inflexible, and has poor support."
"In the next release, I would like to see the connectivity improved to be less complex and more stable."
"UFT is like a flagship of testing tools, but it's too expensive and people are not using it so much. They should work on their pricing to make themselves more competitive."
"I have to keep the remote machine open while the tests are running, otherwise, it leads to instability."
"With Smart Bear products generally, you can have only one instance of the tool running on a machine."
"UFT Developer is good, but it requires high-level development skills. Scripting is something that everybody should know to be able to work with this product. Currently, it is very development intensive, and you need to know various scripting languages. It would be good if the development effort could be cut short, and it can be scriptless like Tosca. It will help in more adoption because not every team has people with a software engineering background. If it is scriptless, the analysts who wear multiple hats and come from different backgrounds can also use it in a friendly manner. It is also quite expensive."
"The initial setup could be less complex."
"The Property Transfer capability could be more user friendly because it is a bit difficult to understand."
"It is challenging doing upgrades and patches because sometimes the environmental variables or suits in the projects get erased."
"Areas for improvement include the security files, endpoints, and process sessions."
"The UI should be flexible. Currently, the UI isn't."
"Performance and memory management both need to be improved because other solutions use less memory for the same amount of data."
"There is a lot of room for improvement, mainly from the point of view of integrating ReadyAPI into the CI pipelines, and also the scripting aspect into Bitbucket."
"They have performance testing also. However, it's not that great."
"The real concern is the load time of applications or real devices when we start our tests. It takes some time to load the application or web browser. Sometimes, it is frustrating too. Since they are real devices, we understand it takes some time to load. However, if it were to improve, then that would be a great asset to the solution. So, we would like better responsive times when opening applications and running tests."
"Lacks the ability to start multiple tests simultaneously."
"The one issue I have is the 14-day trial that a new user gets for free. I understand the concept of the trial period; however, I think this could be revamped to a free 30-minute run time every few months or after a significant update once the trial period has ended."
"The ability to install profiles on iOS real mobile devices should be included."
"We have faced challenges with the availability of mobile devices. There was once or twice where there were no mobile devices available."
"When we were in development, it was a bit of a pain because we have onshore and offshore development. One of our development shops is in India, and we were running tests over there. When some of the users tried to log in, it was slow for them or we didn't have enough licenses. That was during the core development before we even launched."
"An image comparison would be a nice feature to include in the Sauce Labs product."
"Integration with Github, as well as several other similar tools, could be improved."
