Ranorex Studio Reviews

The most useful features to me are the ability to write test scripts in C#, and also record/playback any and all test steps. Ranorex Spy is also a very useful tool.

Ranorex has significantly cut down the time it takes me to run through multiple, repetitive test steps.

They should have support for other OS’s, aside from only supporting Windows. It would also be great if they supported JavaScript as a usable language to write code modules in.

I’ve been using Ranorex for about five to six months.

Ranorex’s customer service is outstanding.

When something is out, I immediately email their tech support and will usually hear back from them within an hour. The forums are also very helpful.

Setting up Ranorex and jumping into your first test suite is extremely easy, even for non-programmers The record/playback feature makes it easy for anyone to automate a test case..

The best advice I can give is geared towards implementation. If you’re capable of writing your own test scripts, then I wouldn’t suggest using the Record/Playback feature at all, aside from maybe looking at the generated code module for help on starting a new test case. There are a lot more constraints that come with using the record/playback method, and you cannot easily implement conditional statements or parameters, like you would be able to in the code modules.

The ability to create test scripts with the flexibility to run them as a whole or as individual test steps within the script. This greatly reduces the amount of time spent creating test scripts.

With completed test automation suites we have greatly reduced the amount of time spent manually regression testing after each software release.

The only real complaints I would have would be a bit of quirkiness in the UI at times, but no application is perfect.

I have used it for about five years.

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered.

Ranorex customer service has been prompt the couple of times I have contacted them. There was one instance where I had an issue and contacted them for a solution they were unable to provide it, and I ended up finding a work around on my own. The Ranorex user blog is al helpful platform.

The initial set-up is very basic, download the executable and run it just like most other programs.

We implemented the product in-house. The only tricky part is if using their floating license option, the configurations need to be set up across the network. My current organization is small so we experienced no issues. Implementing on a much larger scale could be a bit tricky.

The ROI would be the man hours saved by implementing the Automation suite.

The pricing for this tool is acceptable for the amount of features it provides and as for licensing we are small company and only have two licenses. I believe they offer some savings based on the number of licenses purchased.

The ROI would be the man hours saved by implementing the automation suite. The pricing for this tool is acceptable for the amount of features it provides and as for licensing we are small company and only have two licenses. I believe they offer some savings based on the number of licenses purchased.

Based on my experience, this would be my tool of choice for test automation. There are many out there but I have yet to find one that offers all of the features mentioned above in one package.

Our team highly appreciates the ability to use the Ranorex library directly in code. That has enabled to create our own libraries (we call them adaptors) which access various parts of our product.

Due to the ability to code our own adaptors, the code maintenance effort has been reduced. We do not use the Ranorex Studio thus there is no “spaghetti code”, which is difficult to maintain, being created.

Ranorex has truly been a “little monster” able to access even the most complex custom WPF controls. It is a pity Ranorex is not engaging model-based testing technologies.

We have been using the product for the past four years and are quite satisfied with its performance.

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered.

In the rare cases where we have had to contact the technical support, the reply via email came relatively quickly.

All we had to do is to link a couple of .dlls into the automation solution. The complexity was in how to structure the adaptors so that the code maintenance effort could be kept as low as possible, but that had got nothing to do with Ranorex.

We are a QA team capable of writing automation code, thus we implemented everything in-house. Before implementation, think hard on how to structure your automation code, especially your adaptors.

We have a number of floating licenses.

We initially tried out the CodedUI by Microsoft, but the coding effort plus the product maturity at that stage convinced us to pick Ranorex.

We have been employing Ranorex in the field of desktop PC application UI automation. In this particular area Ranorex proved to be a perfect choice. Unfortunately we could not gather any experience in the field of web application automation.

Very easy to learn and use. In my project, other than me, the rest of the team members are college graduates. I learned this tool and trained them, and they were very effective in using this tool and I was able to show the ROI to the customer quickly with a cost effective solution.

This is not as expensive as other tools in the market, and at the same time it supports desktop, web and mobile applications and that, too, is different from the latest technologies.

I told the Ranorex support team that we are learning and using this tool and their support was excellent. In a few cases, they gave us a walkthrough of using the tools as well.

Even though my team was small and part-offshore and part-onshore model team, and almost everyone was at graduate level, at the end of year one, I was able to show savings of roughly $90,000 for my customer. We were able to successfully deliver the product to the market on time, and we were able to execute several times to find critical defects, and I can’t imagine executing the scripts that many times manually.

I have proposed few suggestions to them in the product improvement area. Including, highlighting the exact object/UI where the error occurs, instead of the entire screen capture. A few additional specific technology support that I requested in mobile at the time, and they have probably implemented this in their latest releases.

We have roughly a year of experience in this tool with different versions & releases of this product.

Not really and there were few challenges in mobile connectivity but got the help from support team and it was fixed then and there.

One of the best tool support teams that I received from any vendor. At the time, there were only few people supporting this tool, but still I was getting a prompt response within 24 hours. Sometimes, I used to get a response in one to two hours and the support person would call me to help me to fix the issue - 9/10.

My customer did not use any other solutions before.

It was straightforward and very easy set up.

My team implemented it for a customer.

With a small team of one onshore person and three offshore people, I was able to show the value of $90,000 savings for a project as a POC and the customer is currently using this tool for several other projects in their organization after seeing the ROI for one project.

I got to the break even point in eight months. Based on the number of times it was executed, I believe seven times full regression suite execution and six defect retesting scripts (only for failed scripts) to get ROI. If you use it for bigger project with bigger team, I am sure you may be even able to see better ROI.

To give more specific details, In one year we did the following tasks

• Learnt the Ranorex automation tool
• Used college grads effectively
• Understood the application
• Identified reusable components
• Designed an automation framework
• Developed 1386 automation scripts with a team of one onshore person and three offshore people with various complexities of test cases
• Executed those scripts for each iteration
• Maintained and modified those scripts for any enhancements or application changes

My customer wanted me to do the tool analysis and provide recommendations. I evaluated several tools and picked this because it is easy to learn and use, even at graduate entry level college, and I was able to show the value to the customer by running the scripts in ROI. Multiple technology support and very good Object SPY feature.

Like any other automation tools, first understand the application, identify the reusable components, define the automation framework, and start writing the scripts in Ranorex. Don’t directly start converting the test cases to automation test scripts without setting up the framework. Even if you directly convert test cases to automation test scripts when there are changes comes in the application it is easy to fix it in Ranorex than any other automation tools. Very user friendly tool.

The ability to use code (C#) to control the testing operations as well as the minimal training to get team members up to speed and productive have been valuable features for us.

As a company, we have tried several approaches to institute automated front-end testing with limited short term success. Currently, we are in full production executing thousands of test cases, multiple time per sprints across various platforms. By doing this we have freed up the team to -

1. Do more automation; and
2. Conduct in-depth testing not done previously.

The end results are a significant drop in customer-found defects.

I would like to see Ranorex come up with a load balancing tool for test execution. For example, if I set up 10 VMs as UI clients I would love to be able to provide this group to the test suite so it would send test executions to the next available client. The result would be that I finish testing as soon as possible. 

Also, I would like to see the popup watchers be launched conditionally, and not each as a thread running in the background. For example, if there is a hang in the execution you launch a watcher and check for condition A. If not condition A then launch second watcher and look for condition B.

We have been using Ranorex as our primary UI automation tool for over three years.

We did in fact encounter problems when deploying the tool and to some degree we are still handling some of these problems. The first problem we came across was not unique to Ranorex but was the fact that our front end was applet based and none of the tools explored could interact with the applets in any consistent way. 

We had tried out several tools including the high-end HP suite (with help from one of their architects) with very unstable results. When it came to Ranorex, at least it was stable and we were able to consistently run X,Y coordinate scenarios. Base on that we instrumented the applet code and were able to access it via the User Code modules.

We have in fact had several failed attempts at automation with our product and have been evaluating tools all along. The reason we ultimately settled on Ranorex was a combination of its current state and our being able to overcome problems as the occurred.

Setup is simple and straightforward. The integration with SVN was simple, and the license server was very simple.

By our calculations we are now getting a return of 50% time saved in team efforts, making the team 50% more productive.

It’s always a good idea to negotiate price with vendors to get the best possible deals balance the numbers of licenses with the group/bulk discounts.

Given the makeup and technical level of our entire team and the product we are developing. This was and continues to be a good fit.

Make sure it fits with your team goals and products. Consider the profiles of folk you will need to hire to implement and maintain the testing. There is a stigma with being in QA as opposed to being a developer, so you may implement a tool that is hard to hire for. Take for example Selenium, lots of QA want it on their resume because they can demand more compensation, the profile needed is that of a developer.

Sample results

We primarily use the libraries provided by Ranorex to access our application, and the Ranorex Spy, to view the current application's object model.

By using this product, we have been able to explore some more advanced strategies in developing our automation which has been able to carry over to other automation teams. This has made all of our automation teams suites more robust and accurate with their testing.

There is too much focus on the drag-and-drop features of Ranorex, and not enough focus on the coding modules which we use extensively. As a programmer, would like to be able to come up with a code only interface so that features such as the Test Suite don't have to be used if they don't want to be.

I've used it for around two years.

For a very long time, we were running into crashes with either Ranorex or Ranorex's utility (UIALauncher) which would stop our testing dead in its tracks. These areas would then need to be run test by test, and not in whole batches at a time. We eventually tracked the issue down ourselves to be a rare condition between Ranorex and Windows 8, where both systems were trying to access an element at the same time, and was failing.

Other then not being able to track down the issue above that was plaguing us for quite some time, the Ranorex customer support has been great. The only complaint would be that at one time, we were having issues with our licensing, and while one of our engineers was talking to them for a while. All of a sudden, they said that they were required only the primary account holder to talk to them, which needlessly required a third party to get involved in what was a very minor issue.

When we started evaluating Ranorex, we were already using a number of other products for the various platforms we run automaiton against. Unfortunately, none of the products we were using at the time had the capability to automate Windows 8 apps. Ranorex's ability to do this (the only product we found at the time that could) is the reason we chose the product.

Setup and installation of Ranorex was extremely straightforward. However, getting the initial script running was a bit complex, as we soon found that parts of our application weren't accessible through Ranorex, and the way Ranorex wanted us to create scripts wasn't intuitive to us. We eventually opted out of "their way" of doing things, which is more for a non-coding QA person, and opted for a 99% programming method.

All implementation is done in house with a small team of three to four engineers. My best advice for implementation is that if you can, try to go through a pure programming route with your implementation, and not through the recorded modules. While it may be more time investment in the beginning, it will pay off in the end because you will have a more robust suite that will scale much better then using the "standard" Ranorex Route.

Ranorex, like many other automation tools is expensive. I highly suggest planning out how many licenses you need ahead of time, and try to plan your suite to use as many licenses as possible. With this approach you should be able to get as much testing done as possible without breaking the bank with licensing costs.