We performed a comparison between Oracle Application Testing Suite and Ranorex Studio 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 most valuable feature is the object identification feature."
"OpenScript has many features that make it useful, including the ability to record and playback."
"Oracle Application Testing Suite's most valuable feature is it works very smoothly with all Oracle Java-based applications."
"User friendly UI / Tree view to work with adding steps."
"The graphics are very intuitive and it's very easy to get scale of development."
"The function test feature is valuable."
"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."
"The solution is scalable."
"The most valuable feature of Ranorex Studio is the capture and replay tool. You don't need to do script testing. When you launch any application from Ranorex Studio it automatically captures these test case steps. The next time you can replay the tool the flow automatically happens again. For example, when you do the logging and all the activity will be captured by the tool, and re-execute the same step by using automatization."
"Support is very quick. You can write to them and on the same day, they will respond. This is one of the best features."
"Easy integration with CI Tools like Jenkins, TFS, and TeamCity."
"The scalability is very good. It's probably one of the better tools I've seen on the market."
"Code Conversion is one of the great features because sometimes, the automation tool doesn't have the capability of maneuvering around two specific evaluations."
"I'm from a UFT background, so Ranorex Studio has a similar feel in terms of how it handles objects. It just felt familiar even though I'd never seen it before. However, it doesn't have all the bells and whistles of UFT, but it's a pretty good start, and it's cost-effective."
"The solution is fast and includes built-in libraries that record and playback."
"The solution is intuitive and pretty self-sustaining. You don't need a lot of help with it in terms of setup or assistance."
"If there's a feature we want in OATS that's missing and we report that to Oracle, it takes a long time."
"To provide test automation support for other products like SAP, Windows and Java Applications when it comes to Functional Test Automation testing."
"We would like to see the instruction documentation made into video or audio formats, to help new users get used to the modules."
"Oracle Application Testing Suite does encounter some lag. When I am trying to record something, the tool gets stuck."
"It needs to be compatible with all browsers."
"The pathfinding at times is slow when we are using it. The tool's performance can be improved."
"Oracle Application Testing Suite could improve by offering desktop-based application automation. It is lacking in this area at the moment."
"I have faced issues with some indexing items."
"One of the areas the service could be improved would be to have the training in Italian."
"The automation of the SAP application could perhaps be improved to make it much simpler."
"We are mainly working for manufacturing OEMs but the integration is not available. It would be a benefit if they built one integration tool for all the Teamcenter home servers and software as the main PLM data source. It is a simple process at this time, the integration could be made easier."
"There were a lot of issues we faced. One notable improvement would be better API integration within the tool itself, as we still rely on external tools like Postman."
"I'd like to know their testing strategies and to know what they can automate and what they can't. It can become pretty frustrating if you're trying to automate something that changes on a monthly or weekly basis."
"For our purposes it requires integration with other products to get out the results in the format we want them. Adding this to the product could improve it."
"The object detection functionality needs to be improved."
"Ranorex is used in Windows while other solutions, for example, Katalon Studio, are cross-platform. (But in my opinion, overall, Ranorex is better)."
More Oracle Application Testing Suite Pricing and Cost Advice →
Oracle Application Testing Suite is ranked 13th in Functional Testing Tools with 24 reviews while Ranorex Studio is ranked 12th in Functional Testing Tools with 46 reviews. Oracle Application Testing Suite is rated 7.8, while Ranorex Studio is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Oracle Application Testing Suite writes "Requires little maintenance, is stable, and easy to deploy". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Ranorex Studio writes "Good data security, allowing local installations to prevent data from going to the internet". Oracle Application Testing Suite is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText UFT One, Katalon Studio and Apache JMeter, whereas Ranorex Studio is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, SmartBear TestComplete, froglogic Squish and ReadyAPI. See our Oracle Application Testing Suite vs. Ranorex Studio report.
See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors and best Regression 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.
