We performed a comparison between Silk Test and Telerik Test Studio based on real PeerSpot user reviews.Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, Micro Focus, Sauce Labs and others in Test Automation Tools.
"Scripting is the most valuable. We are able to record and then go in and modify the script that it creates. It has a lot of generative scripts."
"A good automation tool that supports SAP functional testing."
"Has a very smooth process for launching and closing the application after execution."
"Could be more user-friendly on the installation and configuration side."
"We moved to Ranorex because the solution did not easily scale, and we could not find good and short term third-party help. We needed to have a bigger pool of third-party contractors that we could draw on for specific implementations. Silk didn't have that, and we found what we needed for Ranorex here in the Houston area. It would be good if there is more community support. I don't know if Silk runs a user conference once a year and how they set up partners. We need to be able to talk to somebody more than just on the phone. It really comes right down to that. The generated automated script was highly dependent upon screen position and other keys that were not as robust as we wanted. We found the automated script generated by Ranorex and the other key information about a specific data point to be more robust. It handled the transition better when we moved from computer to computer and from one size of the application to the other size. When we restarted Silk, we typically had to recalibrate screen elements within the script. Ranorex also has some of these same issues, but when we restart, it typically is faster, which is important."
"It can be improved by including a feature that allows multiple file types to be selected simultaneously."
Silk Test is ranked 17th in Test Automation Tools with 2 reviews while Telerik Test Studio is ranked 21st in Test Automation Tools with 1 review. Silk Test is rated 7.6, while Telerik Test Studio is rated 7.0. The top reviewer of Silk Test writes "A stable solution with good scripting feature, but needs better scalability and a bigger pool of third-party contractors". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Telerik Test Studio writes "Helps us automate software cases but needs a feature that allows multiple file types to be selected". Silk Test is most compared with Micro Focus UFT One, Selenium HQ, Apache JMeter, Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional and Tricentis Tosca, whereas Telerik Test Studio is most compared with Selenium HQ, Katalon Studio, SmartBear TestComplete, Ranorex Studio and Apache JMeter.
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.