Coming October 25: PeerSpot Awards will be announced! Learn more
Automation Test Consultant at a computer software company with 10,001+ employees
Consultant
Reduces test execution time, performance well for non-web-based applications, but the AI features need to be improved
Pros and Cons
  • "I find UFT One to be very good for thick clients, which are non-browser applications."
  • "The artificial intelligence functionality is applicable only on the web, and it should be expanded to cover non-web applications as well."

What is our primary use case?

I am a consultant in my organization and one of the tasks that I perform is to assist other users with technical issues. Specifically, with UFT One, I am currently evaluating the AI features. I want to experiment with them and find out how it all works so that we can take that information to our customers.

How has it helped my organization?

The fact that UFT One covers multiple technologies helps in terms of end-to-end scenarios. When we have process flows, workflows, or scenarios that span multiple technologies, we don't have to branch out and use multiple tools. This is very helpful.

The platform supports both API and GUI usage, although we have only used it for GUI.

The continuous testing across the software lifecycle is good. When we have done continuous testing, we connect to remote machines and execute the tool. The only problem that we encountered was that when the system is not visible, or not logged in, then there were some issues. However, it has been several months since we tried this.

We have not really put the AI capabilities into practice yet because it is currently only applicable for web-based applications. Our customers have pre-existing tools that already perform this work.

In general, UFT has helped to reduce our test execution time. In particular, with our non-web ecosystem, the execution time has been reduced considerably.

At this point, UFT has not helped us to decrease defects because we are not creating new test cases. Rather, we are automating test cases with it. It might be the case for regression testing, as regression defects are much higher. 

We also use UFT One for SAP test scenarios.

What is most valuable?

I find UFT One to be very good for thick clients, which are non-browser applications. For browser applications, we have a good number of non-commercial alternatives. However, for thick clients, whether they are Java, Mainframe, SAP, or .NET, this solution works pretty well.

The introduction of artificial intelligence in UFT is a step in the right direction.

The UFT automated manual process has helped to increase our test coverage. Not every one of the tools is applicable but there are some provisions in the latest version that can increase the testing coverage.

We perform some of our tests in virtual machines and UFT gives us control over the machine configuration, such as allocating specific resources. That said, we have our virtual machines configured by another team before they are provided to us, so we don't have UFT control them.

What needs improvement?

The AI functionality has a lot of room for improvement, as it has just started. For example, when a particular object is found, you have to scroll down, rather than have it done automatically.

The artificial intelligence functionality is applicable only on the web, and it should be expanded to cover non-web applications as well.

Buyer's Guide
Micro Focus UFT One
September 2022
Learn what your peers think about Micro Focus UFT One. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: September 2022.
635,162 professionals have used our research since 2012.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using Micro Focus UFT One for between six months and one year. More generally, I have used UFT for approximately 12 years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability is pretty good with respect to the traditional functionality, which has been existing for years. Some of the new features might not be as stable. In particular, there is a little bit of instability with the AI features that I have observed. I think that this is acceptable given that it is new.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

This product is scalable in some regards and not others. 

As for extending the execution of tests to other machines, you have to install UFT on every machine and get it started, which may not be very scalable. However, it is scalable in terms of generally extending coverage to other applications. Essentially, once you start automating an application, you can continue to build on that as new requirements or scenarios come in.

How are customer service and support?

I have not personally dealt with customer support, although when I was helping one of our customer teams, there was a problem that I could not resolve and I asked them to raise a ticket. Unfortunately, the issue was not resolved. I was told that the answer from the Micro Focus support team was not helpful.

Five or six years ago, I did deal with UFT support, but it was not for the UFT One product.

I have interacted with the Micro Focus design team, giving my input as to how AI is important. I was told that it's going to be available in upcoming releases.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

I have used other tools including Tricentis Tosca, and I find that one, in particular, to be better for testing web-based applications. There are other tools including TestComplete, but I would recommend UFT One for non-web applications.

Tricentis Tosca is nice because it is a scriptless tool, you don't need to know scripting in order to get it to work. It is more UI-based and a new person can usually do well with it, and there is not much of a learning curve. This is in contrast to UFT One, where you need to know the scripting language in order to automate tests.

What about the implementation team?

I assist our clients in setting up their operations, such as helping to identify objects or setting up the scripting. However, I do not help with the actual deployment.

What other advice do I have?

In the past, UFT One did not support integration with third-party applications such as Jenkins and Bamboo. However, there are now some plugins that are available.

My advice for others who are considering this product is that they are looking to automate non-web applications, then it is a good choice. For web-based applications, I would recommend another tool, such as Tricentis Tosca.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor. The reviewer's company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner
PeerSpot user
Lead Analyst at a computer software company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 20
Automation has helped reduce our testing timeline significantly
Pros and Cons
  • "It helps in identifying defects earlier. With manual testing, that 15-day timeline meant there were times when we would find defects on the 11th or 12th day of the cycle, but with automation we are able to run the complete suite within a day and we are able to find the failures. It helps us to provide early feedback."
  • "We used to run it as a test suite. Micro Focus provides that in terms of a test management tool as ALM, but when we think of integrating with a distributed version control system, like Jenkins, there isn't much integration available. That means we need to make use of external solutions to make it work."

What is our primary use case?

We are working with a desktop-based application and we use the solution to automate testing of the application.

How has it helped my organization?

UFT One has helped us to reduce testing timelines. Earlier, during our manual testing days, it would take 15 days to certify a release, but with UFT One and automation, we are able to achieve that within five days. That's how important it is. It also improves the quality of our testing.

We have also seen an improvement in test coverage, going from 80 percent to over 90 percent.

In addition, it helps in identifying defects earlier. With manual testing, that 15-day timeline meant there were times when we would find defects on the 11th or 12th day of the cycle, but with automation we are able to run the complete suite within a day and we are able to find the failures. It helps us to provide early feedback.

What needs improvement?

There are a few limitations when it comes to automating desktop-based application testing. You need a medium to run the test cases. We used to run it as a test suite. Micro Focus provides that in terms of a test management tool as ALM, but when we think of integrating with a distributed version control system, like Jenkins, there isn't much integration available. That means we need to make use of external solutions to make it work. We have other apps which help us to integrate all the tests into a dashboard. So one area for improvement would be to allow us to run that test suite.

We would also like to see improvement when it comes to generating reports.

For how long have I used the solution?

Micro Focus UFT One is the latest edition, but I have been using UFT for four years. 

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

UFT One provides pretty good stability.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Scalability isn't really applicable to us because we have 10 virtual machines and UFT is installed in all of them. Jenkins is what takes care of the scalability, based on the workload. It allocates the jobs to any number of servers that are available.

I don't know how many people are using UFT One in our company, but on our team we have 15 people working with it. They are testers and automation engineers. 

Plans to increase usage depend on the new initiatives that are coming up. For about a year and a half we have been using UFT on 15 virtual machines, to its full potential. There are plans to increase its usage, because there are new projects coming up and we intend to deploy UFT on them.

How are customer service and technical support?

If there are issues, when we reach out to the support team, they are able to assist us. It may be something like we were running an older version and there was a new deployment that created this kind of issue. But the support team is always able to assist us. I would rate their technical support at nine out of 10 or even a 10.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We didn't have a previous solution. We were looking for a solution where, once the elements of the object repository are created they stay there. Also, when there are changes to the application, how quickly would it be able to transition as a result? We were mainly looking for object identification and consistency of the tool.

There aren't many tools on the market for automating desktop application testing, but one of them is Micro Focus UFT. We tried UFT and it seemed to be suitable, so we started using it for automation testing. It suited our requirements for desktop application testing.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We tried TestComplete, but I was not part of the team when the decision was made to go with UFT One.

What other advice do I have?

Everyone has their own requirements, but based on my experience with UFT, I have found it to be very consistent. If anyone is looking to automate web-based or mobile-based applications, UFT is very good. My advice would be to try it and explore UFT a lot.

Using it, we have learned how to design our framework and how to adapt it to improve our test suite. We have learned how to write effective test cases and how to improve the usability of the functions that we add.

AI is kind of exciting but, at the same time, it's not available for desktop-based applications yet. So we are waiting to make use of AI. In general, AI helps to reduce testing time. It increases the amount of reusability and it also makes the tester's life easier by asking them to identify the objects and differentiate them. In addition, it helps to identify any elements that could be missed by the human eye. Those are the features that we think will be helpful for us, once they are available for desktop application testing.

Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
PeerSpot user
Buyer's Guide
Micro Focus UFT One
September 2022
Learn what your peers think about Micro Focus UFT One. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: September 2022.
635,162 professionals have used our research since 2012.
RABINDRA NATH GOSWAMI - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Associate at Cognizant
Real User
The GUI has automatic settings and doesn't require much skill to use
Pros and Cons
  • "Micro Focus UFT One gives us integration capabilities with both API and GUI components. I like the user interface. It doesn't require that much skill to use and has automatic settings, which is useful for users who don't know what to select. It also has dark and light themes."
  • "The AI feature needs improvement. For banking applications, we input formatted text from documents, but the AI feature is recognizing three fields as one field, e.g., for a phone number, it puts all 10 digits in the international code or country code. Then, the script fails."

What is our primary use case?

We use it for automation. It helps to automate test scenarios for graphical user use cases.

How has it helped my organization?

Historically, we have faced a lot of maintenance issues with automation using traditional UFT, because UFT has a mechanism for identifying an object where you have to add object properties. However, if a change happens in the application and your object properties change, then you have to go and update the object properties again, only then can you use those scripts. So, we were using a lot of personnel for script maintenance. Whereas, in UFT One, I like that our maintenance costs have been reduced by a lot because UFT One is using an artificial intelligence feature to identify objects visually.

We use it to do multi-platform testing. 

What is most valuable?

UFT One Automation provides Codeless Test Automation.

The solution will automatically run a script, so you need less knowledge to run a script.

Micro Focus UFT One gives us integration capabilities with both API and GUI components. I like the user interface. It doesn't require that much skill to use and has automatic settings, which is useful for users who don't know what to select. It also has dark and light themes.

It improves automation efficiency.

What needs improvement?

The AI feature needs improvement. For banking applications, we input formatted text from documents, but the AI feature is recognizing three fields as one field, e.g., for a phone number, it puts all 10 digits in the international code or country code. Then, the script fails. 

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using UFT for the last seven or eight years. UFT One was just launched three or four months back, so I have been using it for a couple of months. 

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It is reliable. Sometimes, the GUI does crash.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It is highly scalable. 

There are around 150 users of UFT One with 8,000 test scenarios running four times a month. We are also running around 500 scripts in UFT One.

How are customer service and technical support?

Our internal team is sufficient for technical issues.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We have used a lot of different tools. We have used Selenium and Python as well as Java-based REST API for regular testing. With UFT one, we have all the solutions under an umbrella, so we don't have to think about other tools. It also supports API and HTML testing. Selenium only supports Java, and there is no support for HTML.

How was the initial setup?

We didn't need to do too much with the initial setup because there is an installation team.

It takes one or two days to create test automation scripts.

What was our ROI?

Object maintenance is reduced.

What other advice do I have?

We have not yet implemented the license for the AI features. However, I got a chance from Micro Focus to join a Hackathon for India when they launched the product, which included the AI feature. I am hoping that my company will implement this feature soon because the solution's AI capabilities will reduce my test creation time.

Every day, tools are getting smarter. UFT One is like this.

Before implementing, do a demo with your existing applications.

I would rate this solution as an eight out of 10.

Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
PeerSpot user
MichaelO'Rourke - PeerSpot reviewer
MichaelO'RourkeProduct Marketing Manager at Micro Focus
Real User

Hello Rabindra,


Thank you for sharing valuable feedback about your experience with UFT One. We are
glad to hear that UFT One has not only reduced your maintenance cost, but has
also sustained its purpose: to be a reliable and scalable testing tool that
serves your business needs.


As always, your business means a lot to us, so thank you again for taking the time to review UFT One.

Test Solution Architect at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Real User
Top 5
Poorly designed, runs slow, and makes test automation really difficult
Pros and Cons
  • "The initial setup is relatively easy."
  • "The overall design needs an entire overhaul. We prefer software designed to ensure the package isn't too loaded."

What is our primary use case?

We primarily use the solution for any test completion intended for the system.

How has it helped my organization?

I don't really see a way it has improved our organization. I don't like this tool and I don't think that it's a successful example for automation. It's because of the tool's limitations that make the automation of a project difficult to execute successfully.

What is most valuable?

The solution is the company's product of choice. We disagree a bit in that regard.

The initial setup is relatively easy.

What needs improvement?

The solution makes test automation really difficult to maintain. The design of the test framework isn't ideal. They should work to improve it.

The concept is really old. It needs to be integrated with EMM, due to the fact that, obviously, EMM is the one to manage your test. It's almost difficult to manage test automation as a project. It's good for video testing, however, it's not good for a project.

The overall design needs an entire overhaul. We prefer software designed to ensure the package isn't too loaded.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using the solution for three years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The solution is stable. However, that said, it's also slow.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The scalability is pretty good. If an organization needs to expand, it should have no trouble doing so.

Our particular projects have more than 50 people on them. Mostly they are from the IT automation team.

How are customer service and technical support?

I didn't really ask for technical support in the past. We didn't really use much of the features, therefore we didn't have technical issues with that tool. I can't speak to their general responsiveness having never spoken with them directly.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

I have never used a different solution. I merely use this solution as it is my company's preferred product.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is not complex. It's quite straightforward.

What other advice do I have?

We're just customers. We don't have any business relationship with Micro Focus.

Personally, the solution doesn't meet my expectations. The design is really old. It's possible we'll be talking about changing soon. I'm not sure if it will happen, however, I would prefer to try something new.

A person with no programming background might really like this solution. I, however, do not. On a scale from one to ten, I'd rate it at a five. I have a technical background and I don't really like using this tool. It's better for someone with less programming experience.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
Don Ingerson - PeerSpot reviewer
Don IngersonQA Automation Engineer at Consultancy
ExpertTop 5Consultant

1) What do you mean by tool’s limitations?


2) Can you please elaborate on what video testing is?


Also, there several different frameworks that can be used with UFT. I am not clear about the context of how you are using the word framework. Can you please elaborate?

Senior Staff Software Engineer at a computer software company with 51-200 employees
Real User
Top 20
The inside object repository is nice
Pros and Cons
  • "The inside object repository is nice. We can use that and learn it through the ALM connection. That's a good feature. The reporting and smart identification features are also excellent."
  • "The UA objects are sometimes hard to recognize, so the coverage should be increased. Open-source alternatives have a broad scope. Also, it's sometimes difficult to make connections between two of the components in the UFT mobile center. It should be easier to set up the wireless solution because we have to set both. We directly integrate Selenium and APM, so we should try to cover all the features they have in APM and Selenium with the UFT mobile."

What is our primary use case?

We use UFT One for functional testing of business process automation. It includes all the modules, and there are different kinds of modules.  

What is most valuable?

The inside object repository is nice. We can use that and learn it through the ALM connection. That's a good feature. The reporting and smart identification features are also excellent. 

What needs improvement?

The UA objects are sometimes hard to recognize, so the coverage should be increased. Open-source alternatives have a broad scope. Also, it's sometimes difficult to make connections between two of the components in the UFT mobile center. It should be easier to set up the wireless solution because we have to set both. We directly integrate Selenium and APM, so we should try to cover all the features they have in APM and Selenium with the UFT mobile.

For how long have I used the solution?

We have been using UFT One for six years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

UFT One is good performance-wise. It's stable and reliable.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

UFT One is easy to scale, and there's no problem. Right now, we have fewer projects, so we're using it less. 

How was the initial setup?

The deployment is simple overall, takes less than 30 minutes, and I can handle it on my own. However, there's one thing. We have a UFT developer add-in built into UFT One. It takes more time to install if you aren't an expert. I think that needs to be communicated. This add-in isn't required, and it can slow down your system. That needs to be communicated, so only the useful add-ins need to be covered. Sometimes if there is an issue, and we need a deeper dive with the logs, we might need to contact support.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

UFT One has some competition from open-source solutions, so the license cost needs to be reasonable, and the demo periods need to be longer. Earlier, the demo period was 90 days, but it has been reduced to 60. 

If we want to cover the market, we need to consider free users, and the demo should be extended for some customers, so they can try the solution and get used to it. Then we can ask them to purchase a license for use.

What other advice do I have?

I rate Micro Focus UFT One nine out of 10. I stop short of a perfect 10 because it has room for improvement with the installation and some add-ins. UFT One has good coverage of different environments and any Windows application or web application. It's like a record-and-play kind of thing. It has many features for that. 

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner
Flag as inappropriate
PeerSpot user
Associate Manager at a transportation company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 5Leaderboard
Integrates well with other test management tools, but it's pricey, and it doesn't support test case panel execution
Pros and Cons
  • "It is very simple to use, and the scripting language is even easier."
  • "I would want to see a significant improvement in the tool's features. The most significant enhancements are support for panel execution and integration with DevSecOps."

What is our primary use case?

Micro Focus UFT One is an automation tool, that is primarily used to automate web and desktop applications.

What is most valuable?

It is very simple to use, and the scripting language is even easier.

Object Identification is very easy. 

The integration with other test management tools is good, which is very good.

What needs improvement?

When it comes to pricing Micro Focus is expensive, and it doesn't support test case panel execution.

I think that over time, Micro Focus has not really understood the market needs.

They are still improvising the UI. 

They need to really understand how this tool fits into the DevSecOps ecosystem. We have been giving that advice, but they have not taken it into account.

I would want to see a significant improvement in the tool's features. The most significant enhancements are support for panel execution and integration with DevSecOps.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been working with Micro Focus UFT One for ten years.

We are working with the latest version.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It's very nice. The stability is good.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Micro Focus UFT One is a scalable product.

We have approximately 100 end users in our company who use this solution.

I am reducing my usage slowly. I am reducing 30 to 40% of the licenses.

How are customer service and support?

We have contacted technical support. They're fine. I don't see the benefit in the chats I had with them about the issues we were having. They are, nonetheless, fine. Our requirement was a far more serious issue. As a result, they were unable to assist us. They're fine, though. They are quite knowledgeable.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

Previously, we did not use another solution.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was very straightforward.

What about the implementation team?

We did not need any assistance. We are good with the knowledge that we have internally.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

We have to pay for licenses. The licensing fee is paid on a yearly basis.

The price is one aspect that could be improved.

What other advice do I have?

I would not recommend this solution to others who are considering it.

I would rate Micro Focus UFT One a five out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate
PeerSpot user
Head of Testing - Warehouse Solutions at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 20
Outstanding UFT solution, but there are issues with the scripting
Pros and Cons
  • "The high-level security, high standard and compatible SAP are great."
  • "The solution does not have proper scripting."

What is our primary use case?

We are currently using it for migration.

How has it helped my organization?

Micro Focus UFT One is useful. However, there is an issue with the scripts. We are going to collaborate with multiple automatic specialists to identify the problem. If we can fix the issue, we will continue with UFT, otherwise, we'll switch to other automation tools.

What is most valuable?

The high-level security, high standard and compatible SAP are great.

What needs improvement?

The solution does not have proper scripting, which impacts the solution. We are currently deciding whether we want to keep the UFT and will decide by the end of December. We paid a lot of money for the UFT, and we will only drop it as a last option.

For how long have I used the solution?

We have been using this solution for four years. It is deployed in the client-server application with SAP.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The performance is not great, which is why we are currently conducting a review.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The solution is very scalable for a UFT. We have more than ten people using this solution.

How are customer service and support?

There is a gap in technical support which is also part of our review. We've raised issues in the past, which have not been fixed in two years.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We used QTP and LoadRunner in the past.

How was the initial setup?

Our deployment was completed in-house, and we have an in-house software development and architecture team. We do all our products and services and also provide services to third parties.

What other advice do I have?

I rate this solution an eight out of ten. Micro Focus UFT One is outstanding. All HP processes are excellent. I used to use HP Test Director, HP QC and HP ALM. So I am confident that Micro Focus UFT One is useful.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate
PeerSpot user
IT Business Analyst at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Easy to set up, the interface is okay, and it works well for end-to-end testing of multiple scenarios
Pros and Cons
  • "The interface is fine and there is nothing else to add in terms of enhancement."
  • "We have had some issues with stability, where it crashes sometimes."

What is our primary use case?

We use this product for end-to-end testing, from order to cash.

What is most valuable?

The interface is fine and there is nothing else to add in terms of enhancement.

It works well for testing multiple end-to-end scenarios.

What needs improvement?

We have had some issues with stability, where it crashes sometimes.

In the next release, I would like to be able to see multiple scripts at the same time.

For how long have I used the solution?

We have been using Micro Focus UFT One for several years, since before it was purchase and renamed from QTP.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

We have had some issues with stability so I would rate it a solid five out of ten in that regard. Middle of the road.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The scalability is okay.

How are customer service and technical support?

We have not yet contacted technical support, although there are areas where we need to. Our contract is set up such that we would not be contacting Micro Focus directly.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was straightforward. It did not take long to deploy because there are only two departments using it right now. It is not company-wide.

What other advice do I have?

My advice for anybody who is implementing this product is to be aware that it lends itself to having coding knowledge. I would say that you have to be comfortable with coding to use it.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
Don Ingerson - PeerSpot reviewer
Don IngersonQA Automation Engineer at Consultancy
ExpertTop 5Consultant

Can you please elaborate on the stability situation you are encountering? Do you mean UFT using a lot of memory when executing scripts?

Buyer's Guide
Download our free Micro Focus UFT One Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.
Updated: September 2022
Buyer's Guide
Download our free Micro Focus UFT One Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.