| Type | Title | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Category | Functional Testing Tools | May 24, 2025 | Download |
| Product | Reviews, tips, and advice from real users | May 24, 2025 | Download |
| Comparison | OpenText UFT Developer vs Tricentis Tosca | May 24, 2025 | Download |
| Comparison | OpenText UFT Developer vs OpenText UFT One | May 24, 2025 | Download |
| Comparison | OpenText UFT Developer vs UiPath Test Cloud | May 24, 2025 | Download |
| Title | Rating | Mindshare | Recommending | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tricentis Tosca | 4.1 | 20.1% | 96% | 110 interviewsAdd to research |
| Katalon Studio | 3.9 | N/A | 89% | 47 interviewsAdd to research |
OpenText UFT Developer was previously known as Micro Focus UFT Developer, UFT Pro (LeanFT), Micro Focus UFT Pro (LeanFT), LeanFT, HPE LeanFT.
Walmart, Hitachi, American Airlines, PepsiCo, AT&T, Ericsson, United Airlines
In a very small location, we are using this solution for the infrastructure-related applications for testing and with a very low number of licenses, only two.
We are planning to change to SAP S/4HANA.
The cost is the most important factor in this tool.
Feature-wise it's okay, and it's comparable with other tools. All of the features that we need for our testing are available.
We have additional features such as reporting, and one other important feature, in UFT, is the AI-based object recognition plugin. This is a good feature in UFT.
UFT is more code-based, and we have to have knowledge of VB scripting to prepare the automation test cases. This is an area that is lagging behind with UFT.
One of the biggest challenges we face is not being able to easily interact with ALMs, other than HP ALM. This is an area that needs improvement.
In the next release, I would like to see the connectivity improved to be less complex and more stable.
Also, they can improve the coding interfaces to be easier and closer to English or any other international language, rather than a programming language.
I recently started with this solution just two months ago, but the company has been using this tool for ten years.
This solution is quite stable. We have been using it for ten years with no technical challenges involved.
At times, we do have some problems connecting with other ALMs because somehow it is a managed connection.
There are many sharp and live connectivities provided by the UFT with other ALMS. We may face some hacks at times.
We have not yet explored this area, because we are extending our requirements and our requirement is not expanding a lot.
In the future, we have to scale it for mobile applications and for other non-UFT areas. We may have to purchase additional licenses for mobile testing.
I think that this tool is scalable, but have not used this feature yet.
Technical support is good.
They are very quick, the response time is very good.
We are satisfied with the support.
The initial setup was quite easy.
It's one installation file, then everything was just connected to the server.
There is no complexity in the installation.
There are some tools in the market that are cloud-based and are much easier to use because you only have to log in and use it.
Pricing is the biggest feature. When we compare in the market with other tools that have similar features, it may be a little bit extra, but the cost is ten times less.
We are planning to use SAPS/4HANA for migration testing and to have more licenses for more testers.
If someone is starting right from the beginning, I would not recommend they go with UFT. Instead, I would recommend Tosca.
The good points in UFT are the cost, it's easy to use, the installation is quite clear, the licensing model is quite good, and the object recognition feature is very good.
The con is that the code-based it not a good thing. Tosca has better features in terms of analytical capabilities. The impact analysis is available in Tosca, yet not offered in UFT.
I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.
