OpenText UFT Digital Lab Reviews

I use the product to automate mobile application testing and I usually use Mobile Center every day.

The ability to automate testing is the most valuable for me because it is something I need to do every day. In general, in my opinion, Mobile Center is a good product that allows us to do everything we need to automate application testing for mobile.

I think the interface is not good very good and I have used other solutions that are easier to learn. Also the time it takes to connect the mobile and the interface is not up to speed. I think that there are other ways the product could be configured to detect devices more quickly in order to speed up use. When I connect my device to evaluate it can take a few minutes to see the device on my computer.

I want to see better documentation because it was not so good in the last version. It needs a better explanation for implementing everything in Mobile Center. In the beginning, I had constant problems to connect Mobile Center because I could not find a good explanation to document Mobile Center working with EFT (Unified Functional Testing). I think that you cannot do this job without that kind of product support.

It is a good solution when you have implemented it. When you put your device in the server and when you launch your application every day in the server, it is a good solution and does not fail. It is better when you launch the test automation in a local device, but it is a good solution either way.

I think the solution is scalable. We only have seven or eight people working with it now. There are not any immediate plans to increase usage soon, but it should not be a problem.

I think that technical support is not above average, but it is good.

I'm confident with Mobile Center now and I like to resolve issues myself. When I have a problem, I have had trouble finding answers because the documentation is only on their site. I don't find other responses and other communities, so it is not as easy as it could be.

The company was previously using a different solution. They wanted to switch to working with UFT so we like this product better for EFT configuration. We work with Mobile Center because with this solution our testing is more complete. 

I don't remember if I have encountered a real problem with the product.The initial setup was not difficult as far as doing the installation. But I did find that understanding the program and configuration was initially a little complex.

I know I succeeded in deploying Mobile Center with the installer and to launch the test automation in Mobile Center.

We did our own installation.

We compared Mobile Center with Bitbar. Actually, the company used Bitbar, which is another source which is primarily ranked with Mobile Center. It was not as well integrated with EFT.

In rating the product on a scale of one to ten where ten is best, I would rate this product a seven. 

I think that Mobile Center can offer a good platform and practice to do your work. It is easy to implement and easy to configure once you get used to the product.

The problems are the lack of better documentation and more friendly user interface.

It provides an integrated view of HPE solutions and gives insight to the services and apps you have developed; A powerful tool enabling multi-platform and multi-site testing, application performance monitoring, and user experience assessment of mobile apps.

The main benefit is that you can get a very quick idea regarding the performance of your application. It also helps you discover hidden pain points that you would not have found without using this tool. The main pain points are the performance of your apps and the user experience. When you build something in the lab or on some devices, you cannot predict what the actual user experience will be. Additionally, you cannot imagine what problems you may face when this app starts being used.

I'd like to see an extension to the ability to monitor and to operate in an ecosystem of applications; not only our applications, but also the applications of our partners. Our partners expect from us, as a major telecom operator, to create an environment in order to give the ability to integrate their apps with our public APIs. If our partners can do that, we build a very strong relationship among all these parties. But, we have to support and protect our brand and the outstanding quality of our services. We have to consider how all these ecosystems and integrated apps work to provide the services they promised to.

I don't have a very clear idea about stability, because we haven't used it yet. We have tested internally, and we are planning to implement Mobile Center soon.

I believe scalability is good. Considering that this is developed based on the best practices of HPE development, I believe that it will be scalable. It must certainly be scalable in order to be used by an organization like us.

Our impression of HPE support services is quite good. However, in some cases we discovered some issues for HPE support regarding the latest enhancements; the delivery time for these enhancements is not as fast as we would like.

We were not using any similar products previously.

I recommend Mobile Center because I believe that it is a solution that covers a gap in this area. I believe that HPE has a vision to invest in this area and invest in this service and this tool. I strongly believe that HPE is one of the main players in this area.

Has more testing on real devices along with emulators. Using the existing enterprise tools, like UFT, or even if you want to go open source, you can use them and it's a real user-functional performance, we are able to achieve that.

Mobile Center is pretty new for HP. Other than the HP solution, we also use Mobile Labs. The ability to test and open it up to the development teams so it's the entire shift left. You try to give something to the development team ahead of time rather than them trying to analyse how it could work and it's on a real device which they need to support. That's number one.

Number two is cutting down cost of procuring the actual devices. Now you can create a private cloud within the organization so people understand what ability you need to have a consolidated set of devices and utilizing the solution.

It's very new to HP. They need to go beyond the HP world.

It depends on what your requirement is. You can go from either using anybody else's mobile phone or whatever that you want to use and you can do that. That's how it is. It's scalable but from a mobility perspective you can only scale it to a level, because you already achieved what you want to achieve.

I've not had to contact tech support.

It's pretty straightforward as long as you know how the tool is designed to work and the architecture behind how you need to implement it for your environment.

Within a year they were able to produce what it currently is, so they are moving in the right direction.

The key feature is the ease of use. We want to make sure that when our customers get the product, it's not going to be on the shelf for six months. They want to be able to readily use each solution productively. Whether that includes the product itself in our services, or just the product itself. We want to make sure that they're going to be using it.

I think the biggest issues that I've seen, and this is a personal view of mine, is that most of the HPE products have a common look and feel to them. I'd really like to see it be a little more customizable to a use and user standpoint. For example. I happen to be colors blind, so I'd like to see more vivid colors on the UI, and things like that. It would make it a little more flexible from the customer standpoint.

I was formally an HP employee, so I've used the HP products in the past. I also was a former Mercury Interactive employee who was acquired by HP.

It's been extremely scalable as far as the testing that we've done with our customers. They've all been really satisfied with the scalability of the HPE products.

We work on an almost daily basis with the R&D team and they've been extremely helpful in solving issues that we have with customers - issues that we've had with the product itself such as How do I do this, How do I do that, and so forth.

We've been involved with Mobile Center since its inception. With some of the other products, it was more later down the road, but with Mobile Center it's been right from the inception.

Since it was a slightly different way of doing things, it was a little complex. It was just the idea of ... this is something new that we have to understand. It wasn't like we're building on a product that already existed, it was right out of the box. It's fairly new, so it was a little more complex that way but R&D made it very easy.

It's relatively easy to use and it allows you to use decentralized devices to test with. I don't know if it's that important. There are some negative drawbacks to it, but it's flexible. It's a different option with them being centralized.

The ability to test mobile devices, which is pretty important. We can test different flavors of mobile devices, different versions of the operating systems on those mobile devices. That's pretty important for us.

The integration with ALM so that it could be part of the ALM flow and process, that would be a home run.

There's been no stability issues.

We've used it on a limited basis, in small pockets. I think the scaling would be tough with the decentralized approach to the devices. It may work out, there's pluses and minuses to doing that.

We're also using Sauce Labs, and we're actually using it a lot more. It actually integrates better with ALM. It allows centralized management of mobile devices, and the administration piece of it is a little bit easier, because Mobile Center uses lists to manage.

We had no issues with the deployment. It seems fairly straightforward.

HPE actually gave us the software with other purchases for a couple of years, so we've had different teams that have wanted to use it. Those teams have just kind of gone out and done it on their own, so we haven't had a concerted effort to deploy it across the organization.

The pricing is great. It was free for two years. I don't know what the cost is going to be after two years.

The big thing to speak to HPE about is what's next, because that's what's going to be important. I don't think the product as it is right now is going to sell itself, but it's really what are the next steps. I think a lot of people are still relatively new at testing the mobile app, so it's the next year or two that is going to be real important.

This helped my prior organization immensely due to the ability to remotely manipulate devices, even by offshore vendors. Additionally, coupling automation with UFT and/or LeanFT led to more robust and faster testing of software releases. Furthermore, the addition of the Amazon device farm in version 2.0 make this solution a serious leader in the mobile testing space.

The network virtualization (Shunra NV) saves real money for users as data plans are not required to simulate real world conditions. Additionally, the Amazon device farm and ability to add emulation allows users to have access to almost any device one could think up!

I have experience with the product since it launched with version 1.0. Obviously with a nascent product, the stability and feature set is still being formed completely. Now, with version 2.0, many more features are available and stability is much improved. However, it is still a young product that is improving leaps and bounds each release.

• Management of a pool of devices that can be made available globally for automated, manual or performance tests, via a slick interface.  
• Strong integration with HPE tools, ALM, UFT, Sprinter and LeanFT, and the integration with non HPE tools.  
• Strategic solution that pulls in real world analytics from AppPulse Mobile to aid in definition of strategy and integrates with Network Virtualisation to see how the device will run under real network conditions.  
• Primary usage is on real devices but also supports emulators.  
• The 2.0 release extends capability to AWS device farm.

It is enabling a global strategy to be put in place.  Our largest implementation is with a global team.  The solution provides a controlled device farm with the right devices (selected based on analytics), that are readily available (can be reserved), have the right app and can be used for manual or automated tests.  

Manual testing (with Sprinter) is accelerated with steps being captured automatically with exploratory testing, storyboards being captured and device logs etc. automatically being attached to defects (that can be sync'ed back to non-HPE tools or raised directly in non-HPE tools).  Net effect, developers get the right info to address issues quickly and efficiently.

Automation allows fast and efficient testing across a range of devices, this would not be feasible manually.  The skills and good practice used for non-Mobile directly apply. Shared Object Repositories and Application Models make a big difference for maintainability - object recognition has always been a HPE strength.

There has been a notable shift in emphasis, from the on device get it to work, to strategy and how the full benefit of the solution, with analytics and NV is used.  

Mobile Center development is moving at pace.  With versions prior to 2.0 I found that configuration was trickier than it should be, particularly with aspects such as NV.  With 2.0, the NV installation is straightforward and integrations are performed prominently via the UI.  I had one issue on installation of the stack for MC 2.0 (MC, UFT, LeanFT), I found a workaround and found that I also had responsive support.

This is a solution that's easy to use. It also gives us the possibility to use real devices connected either on the Mobile Center server or on our own computers. And it works with both iOS and Android devices.

We now have the ability to test our app on real devices instead of just on virtual devices.

There are couple of improvements I'd suggest. First, it would be helpful to have a Windows Server version instead of just Linux. Second, I think it would be a good idea to have an interface to manage the server, specifically to run Android Debug Bridge (ADB) commands.

I've used Mobile Center for 4 months.

Deployment was an issue. Each time we set it up and deployed, it failed and we had to relaunch it again.

Also, we weren't able to set up the Windows components.

Other than the deployment issue, once it was running we didn't have any issues with stability.

Scalability is not a relevant issue with this solution.

I never used customer service.

I never used technical support.

We had not prior solution to this.

The initial setup was complex because Mobile Center is only supported on Linux. There was also the issue with deployment failure once we did set it up.