SmartBear TestComplete Reviews

The most valuable features are the desktop and mobile modules.

The licensing costs are a little bit high and should be reduced.

I would like the ability to automatically distribute web applications to all of the concurrent users.

We have been using TestComplete for the past two years. 

The stability is good.

The technical support is quite good.

The initial setup is not too straightforward and not too complex. I would say that it's okay.

The price varies depending on the plan that you choose. The option we chose was around $2,000 USD.

I am currently investigating the differences between TestComplete and TestLeft.

TestComplete is a good product compared to other options that are on the market.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

We have what we call a UK tax related application. We are using the solution to automate some functional cases of the application. Use case wise, it's usually used more on the accounting side, which is the main purpose of the application. With the available functional testing of workflows, we are able to have accountability there.

The solution's most valuable aspect is how easy it is to create tests. For example, recording options.

The reporting is ready to use and doesn't require any setup.

We can easily create test suites without much trouble. For example, by using the UFP test, we can directly create a test suite. 

The test object repository needs to be improved. The hierarchy and the way we identify the objects in different applications, irrespective of technology, needs adjustments. The located and test objects are not as flexible compared to other commercial tools.

I have three or four months of experience on the solution. I am an architect on technical optics. Different teams work on the project as well. I mentor them sometimes as part of my job. As far as hands-on experience goes, I can say I've only actually been using it for a few months. It hasn't been more than that.

Our company as a whole, on the other hand, has been using the solution for the better part of four or five years now.

We haven't had any problems with stability. It's reliable. We haven't witnessed any bugs or glitches. It doesn't seem to crash on us or to freeze.

The solution is scalable. There are no issues in that sense. If a company needs to expand out the solution they can do so easily. We can add as many artifacts as we want.

I'm not sure if we have plans to increase usage in the future.

I've never used technical support, so I can't speak to how good technical support is.

The initial set up was not complex. I can say it's straightforward due to the fact that we have started out relatively small. We have gradually developed it. We continue to build it out all the time. That made it simple. This was important for us, as our team didn't have too much experience with the solution. 

The deployment was handled by my IT team. I did not handle the deployment personally.

The implementation was handled in house by our own teams.

The pricing is reasonable. It's not too expensive as a solution. We're satisfied with the billing so far.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

If you compare it with competitors, the object identification needs to be improved. It also needs to ensure that going forward it supports new technologies. We are seeing a lot of new technologies coming up. It's important that test companies support these new advancements. If they do, then it will give testers a reason to try them out and hopefully adopt the solution. It's a win-win.

The solution is also great for language flexibility. It's important to support a number of languages to help increase user adoption.

I'd recommend this solution to other organizations. It's one of three I'd recommend for sure based on the pricing and feature offering it has. Of course, this is just a recommendation n terms of a commercial tool. Open-source tool recommendations are a whole other question.

I'm currently are trying to apply it to our software application.

We use it for testing Windows applications for CUTE, based on the CUTE framework. For now, that's all we use it for because Complete does not suggest any other options that are appropriate for us. By that, I mean it doesn't seem to work with Mac OS, Android OS, and iOS.

I only have experience with Windows, so I find all the best features are for that operating system.

Complete works perfectly with CUTE. That includes all dialogues, right-click menus, or system dialogues, etc., which are handled well.

The solution has a great feature called macro recording. With it, I can make it into a macro in a few of the languages Complete suggests. This is really useful for me, personally.

The solution needs to extend the possibilities so that we can test on other operating systems, platforms and publications for Android as well as iOS.

Right now, Complete can test only on native Android and native iOS applications.

I've been using the solution for about a month. 

This tool is quite stable. I had only one crash, and I sent a report for this crash to technical support. Everything else seems to work perfectly. Aside from the one issue, we haven't had any other problems.

I don't have any experience, unfortunately, with scalability. We use just one instance on one machine so I've never attempted to scale the solution. There's just one user on the platform right now.

I am not sure if our organization will extend its usage in the future. We have a strong need to make this work on other platforms. We may switch to a different tool.

I do have some experience with technical support. I've found a few answers to my issues on Smart BF5. I've also had assistance with the support engineers. So far, I've been satisfied with the level of support I have been able to receive. 

I have used other solutions, including ALTA. It has good UI, but I don't know if you are really able to directly compare it to this solution. 

The initial setup is straightforward. We found it simple and not too complex. Our team didn't run into any issues.

For us, deployment took two to three days.

We didn't use an integrator, reseller or consultant for the deployment. We handled the entire process ourselves.

I'm not sure if there are licensing costs involved in the solution. We simply bought the product outright and started using it.

I'm currently working with the latest version of the solution.

My advice to others is to just decide if this tool is usable for your requirements. I spent a lot of time developing some tests, but then I understood that we actually needed more platforms. That's why we will switch to another tool. That's also why it's important to check your organization's requirements. Otherwise, like us, you may need to switch.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

We primarily use the solution in our data center as an application.

The solution is great as a record and playback tool. It also has valuable regression testing.

The solution needs more training manuals or some form of online forum for learning. It needs more documentation. 

Some sort of troubleshooting portal should be available for users.

The solution could be faster. It would be good to increase the reusability of the code so that rerun time can be saved. It would be ideal to be able to run multiple scenarios at the same time.

Right now, in terms of recording and scripting the solution is not user-friendly. They need to improve on this.

I've been using the solution for one and a half years.

The stability needs a bit of improvement. On the open-source version, you're not really able to check stability like you can on the paid version.

The solution is definitely scalable. We have about ten licenses. We may increase usage in the future.

Technical support could be better. The exact solutions we need should be provided in a more timely manner.

We didn't previously use a different solution.

The initial setup was straightforward. It's a straightforward installation. Deployment took about half a day.

We handled the implementation ourselves.

The solution is pretty good. Other options to use are TestComplete, and, for negative scenarios, Katalon Studios.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We primarily use the solution to automate the user interface.

The solution helps improve the stability of our product. It also decreases the work of our manual quality assurance engineers.

The most valuable features are the script recording and the object spy. The solution has the ability to structure text well using different modules.

The solution needs Mac OS support. Right now, the solution has only been developed to accommodate Windows OS.

The solution has impressive stability.

There are some unsolved issues working with control drop downs that need to be resolved.

The initial setup is easy. You just have to click and go. It was very fast for me on my desktop, however, I cannot speak to how fast it was on the production server.

Currently, we're evaluating the product, so we have not yet bought a license.

Right now, we're in the process of evaluating this product and Squish.

I'm using the desktop version of the solution.

Right now, I'm working with TestComplete, and will compare it to another product called Squish. Once I've compared the two, I'll make recommendations to my customers and our company about whether or not to buy the complete solution.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. I'd rate it higher if the solution offered the ability to test on Mac OS.

I use this solution for functionality testing, API testing, and performance testing.

We are moving away from this solution to use Eggplant Functional.

The most valuable feature of this solution is regression testing tools.

The SoapUI tools are very good, as well as cross-browser capabilities.

The GUI is very good.

There is a problem with usability because the speed decreases, which could be an issue with scalability because of too many hits on the site. It depends on how distributed their systems are, and how well they can handle multiple connections.

The artificial intelligence needs to be improved.

I have been using this solution for between six and twelve months.

This is a good product in terms of stability.

The technical support for this solution is always available. They have an online chat that is quick.

The initial setup of this solution was quite smooth. It was not complicated and within a week it was working. It did not take long.

We performed the implementation in-house.

This is a pay-per-use service that is not expensive, and cost-efficient if you have a small team.

We have also been using Eggplant Functional, and the decision has been made to move forward with that solution, instead of SmartBear. It is not for technical reasons. I also find Eggplant to be a little bit pricey.

This product is quite mature, able to compete with other products in the market, and I would highly recommend it. Overall, we're very pleased with the implementation.

My advice to anybody who is considering this solution is to do a PoC and try this solution out. They can always reach out to me for help, and I can assist.

The biggest lesson that I have learned from using this solution is that there is a lot of hard work going on behind the scenes with this tool, to make each customer's journey easier. This tool is simple to implement and easy to use. If you don't have much time to do a lot of reading then it is still easy to take each case and adopt it quickly.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We use this solution for test automation. A few months ago we began working on a project, and this solution is part of an evaluation phase. We are trying to include the whole suite from SmartBear including HipTest and SoapUI Pro.

Our primary use case is a web solution that we are trying to get working on the mobile solution, based on Flutter. All of our apps are built on Flutter, which is still very new for us. There is no support right now, so we are working closely with SmartBear TestComplete to integrate it.

We have an on-premises deployment.

The most valuable feature is the integration with Azure DevOps. That has been, by far, the best thing for us. We can use it to integrate everything that we are running in the test automation tool, which is linked directly to the test cases. This is the only tool on the marked at actually has this functionality, and it has only come about since 14.2, the latest version.

What is currently missing from this solution is better support for mobile testing. This is what we are currently negotiating with them for.

Specifically, we would like to see Flutter support in the next release of this solution.

From my experience at this point, I would say that this solution is stable. Even with the earlier versions, as long as you set it up properly, it was stable.

In terms of scalability, I think that it works pretty well if you have agents.

We have not spoken directly with technical support. Currently, we are talking to the product manager.

We are using the SmartBear suite, which meant that setting up TestComplete was pretty straightforward. As we are still evaluating, it has not been fully deployed.

We haven't fully evaluated this solution, although I know that they have made a lot of updates since I worked on it the last time. The results of this evaluation will set the standard for other projects. We are creating the basis for everything. As things progress, it will be me creating the test, but it will be executed on several machines.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

Evaluated for automating regression suite for windows desktop application and found testcomplete suits well in the aspect of identifying most of the objects and in few other parameters.

Good test coverage through automation and provides unique solutions to the most of automation challenges (e.g. comparison of images).

- Object spy eases the object identification method.

- TextObject recognition feature of this product exposes most of the objects to perform the actions.

- Test items, project variables helps in managing automation suite and scheduling execution.

- Jenkins integration to schedule executions.

- Integrated with selenium webdriver.

- Conversion of JScript project to Javascript project

- Integrated to Environment manager

- Support to read text from PDF

- Increased performance with less memory and cpu usage.

- Supports various and different versions of browsers in web testing.

- Support to Windows mobile application. (Native iOS and Android apps are supported currently.)

Customer Service:

Customer service and technical support from SmartBear is more responsive. Active SmartBear forums are available to get clarification.

Technical Support:

Customer service and technical support from SmartBear is more responsive. Active SmartBear forums are available to get clarification.

In-house team is used for implementing framework for automation through TestComplete. Tool must be explored completely and knowing its unique features is more important before implementation as it has lot of inbuilt features.

TestComplete now have come up with three modules (Web, Desktop & Mobile), so based on the type of product for automation, it is adequate to purchase the required module. Node-locked and floating license are available which could be decided based on the team composition and work strategy. Current license pricing is available at http://smartbear.com/product/testcomplete/pricing/