"Performance-wise, it is a great tool."
"The ability to quickly make your own components has been valuable."
"It is a very common and strong product. A lot of support is available for this product."
"Easy to use and easily scalable."
"The most valuable features are tools like IntelliSense and ReSharper."
"I was satisfied with the support given by customer service."
"The stability has always been very good."
"It is very easy to use. You can handle a lot of things together at once in one package, which is a good point for us."
"The scripting methodology is easy to learn. It is easy to maintain because it is presented in a simple, narrative way. You don't need to know programming." "It has reduced our test maintenance time by more than 50 percent because we don't have to do manual test processes. We have saved over 150 man-hours monthly. It has increased our delivery times. We went from 200 man-hours down (three weeks work time frame) to approximately 40 man-hours (three days work time frame)."
"Automation using Worksoft Certify has saved our testing times by 40% to 50%."
"Certify integrates with other tools and it works very well with other machine testing applications."
"Certify's web UI testing abilities for testing of modern applications like SAP Fiori was good when we started and they developed it to be even better. We all know that web applications can change objects in DOM quite fast and it breaks tests. To counter it Certify has made object recognition more flexible and generic, so we don't have any troubles."
"It does allow for good reusability. When it's designed properly and utilized properly, we can put things in a way that allows for reusability, meaning a lot of reuse of VA01, if they're very similar flows, to keep it simple."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to automate quickly and to maintain and update scripts."
"The decoupling of the test scripts from the data and the application is a nice feature. When you are creating test scripts, for example, for a web application, you have to learn about Worksoft and how the controls of a screen can be interpreted by Worksoft. For that purpose, you create so-called maps. These maps are loosely coupled to your scripts, which means if the application is changed, the control will be changed from an identifier. You don't need to rework the entire script. You only need to do these adjustments in the map, and then you can automatically reuse the scripts. So, it is really a smart move to have the decoupling of scripts, maps, and data."
"The biggest feature is the fact that it's codeless. It takes away the problem of finding people with the correct programming language, since there are multiple such languages. It saves time in introducing people to the solution because they don't need programming knowledge, they just need to be able to think logically. This makes it vastly usable by more people who are not even acquainted with IT at all."
"The solution is quite expensive."
"The pricing of this solution should be lowered."
"One of the problems with this solution is you need to be highly technically skilled to operate it, it is not for everyone."
"The integration with Git needs improving because it is a bit disjointed and unpredictable."
"In Visual Studio we still don't have anything which can pinpoint memory leaks on a certain code line."
"There are too many features with the product and I would like there to be less."
"It needs more integration with other tools for monitoring. Microsoft also needs to make it more modern to make it work with microservices and the cloud. It is a bit outdated currently."
"When it comes to mobile testing, we have a small bottleneck there. You have to buy third-party separate licenses if you want to test on a mobile. Business wise we see room for improvement there, although it's that really critical for us."
"An area that I would like to see improved is how the permissions are applied. If you're applying permissions groups to a user, one of the options is to delete the group entirely and lose the entire permission group, rather than just deleting the permission from the user, which seems a little silly. In my opinion, that whole module of permissions is very confusing and lends itself to common errors."
"Worksoft Certify needs a bit of improvement for its web-based processes. It can be difficult because you need to recall the maps, then you still have to add-on for your browser. When you are using the browser-based testing, you cannot even move your mouse or do anything on your system when you are using the web-based testing. Therefore, it needs a bit of improvement on that side. While it does work, it needs improvement. From the SAP side, there is nothing better than Worksoft Certify. However, from the web-based, we are moving towards Fiori. SAP will soon be totally web-based. For Fiori, they need to be great with SAP testing. Thus, Worksoft has to improve the web-based testing part for Certify."
"Certify is integrated with Solution Manager, but this integration could be easier."
"Pricing is a bit high and we would like to have the availability of a trail environment for beginners and training would be great to have and easier to expand and use by more and more consultants."
"Performance on the web UI part, especially with some of the more comprehensive Fiori features, like the complex tables that are being used, could be improved. In those cases we have noticed a lot of execution-time increase with regards to the Certify solution."
"As part of our weekly regression, we wanted to use Execution Manager. However, from 2017 until March 2021, Execution Manager was not working as expected in our enrollment. It could have been better. If Execution Manager had worked well, then we could have doubled our productivity. Unfortunately, it had problems."
"With the codeless process automation across packaged applications, once in a while, if we get a weird application that's not widely used, it gets a little stickier. First, the software has to learn the fields, so you have to identify all the fields. Once you do that, as long as there isn’t any non-standard code in the application, then it works fine. But there's that one step that you have to do, a step you don't have to do with SAP and Salesforce, for example."
Visual Studio Test Professional is ranked 12th in Functional Testing Tools with 8 reviews while Worksoft Certify is ranked 4th in Functional Testing Tools with 10 reviews. Visual Studio Test Professional is rated 8.2, while Worksoft Certify is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Visual Studio Test Professional writes "Offers lots of features, including memory analysis and code sharing". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Worksoft Certify writes "Enables us to automate end-to-end testing of our integration between S/4HANA and Salesforce.com". Visual Studio Test Professional is most compared with TFS, Apache JMeter, Katalon Studio, Tricentis Tosca and HCL AppScan, whereas Worksoft Certify is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Selenium HQ, Micro Focus UFT One, Eggplant Digital Automation Intelligence and SmartBear TestComplete. See our Visual Studio Test Professional vs. Worksoft Certify report.
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.