What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise?

The price of OpenText Enterprise Performance Engineering (LoadRunner Enterprise), including pricing, licensing, and setup cost, is reasonable. It is neither cheap nor expensive.

In 2019, I was dealing with the costs of LoadRunner. While I don't remember the exact figures, JMeter being free and RPT being cheaper makes them attractive. The high cost of LoadRunner, in contrast, often caused customers to switch.

The pricing is based on the licensing you require. The prices would differ depending on the number of licenses you need. I wouldn't maybe compare it to any other tools. I rate the price as seven out of ten.

In South Africa, for a load license with about 5,000 concurrent users, the annual license, not including patches, is around 1.5 million to 2 million, depending on the currency exchange. That's a lot of money, especially for startups. Sometimes, you might have the license renewed for support, but if the application is stable, you might not need the annual fee. It can feel like throwing money away.

I rate the product's pricing a three out of ten.

There are a lot of negotiations going on right now about the product's pricing. There is a bit of unhappiness on that aspect and how it's currently being presented versus how it was presented previously.

I do not deal with pricing and licensing. My job is to make the engineering work.

The tool is very expensive. It's probably one of its biggest weak points. As a capability manager for performance, it's a battle every year to substantiate the cost. There's an opportunity for OpenText to help us educate people who are not in the field.

We got an 80 percent discount for the product. It was cost-effective, but licenses tend to get expensive.

We used the Professional version and then moved to the enterprise version. We have subscribed to 1000 user licenses. The tool will be super expensive if we take up 5,000 user licenses. We have to limit ourselves on testing.

OpenText/Microfocus productions are costly. They need to focus on minimizing the cost.

The suitability of the solution depends on the specific needs and requirements of an organization or project. It also depends on which model will be integrated and used, as does the price structure and the licensing. We are content with the pricing and find it to be reasonable in terms of value for money. The only challenge is when it comes to large enterprise companies that are working with multiple suppliers. The integration of licenses is very difficult or in some cases, impossible.

The solution should decrease its price.

I'm not sure if other similar solutions are cheaper, but Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise is expensive, and could easily be 20 percent cheaper. I give the cost a one out of ten.

The solution is pretty expensive. I can't speak to the exact cost. I'd rate it three out of five in terms of affordability.

I don't know this as a fact. However, I've heard that LoadRunner is pricey. I have heard from different customers that although LoadRunner's a great product, sometimes they are looking for alternatives, since the pricing model for LoadRunner's very expensive. Sometimes customers will look at other options for testing tools due to the cost.

We are an enterprise company so we have a license with Micro Focus. I believe that if you have up to 50 users, there is an open-source option.

LoadRunner Enterprise's price is high, but it gives more value for money than some cheaper alternatives.

As I'm an end-user of Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise and not involved in its licensing, I don't have information on how much it costs.

We purchased the license via SAP.

The price is a bit too high.

The price of Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise could improve, it is expensive.

The contract that we had with Micro Focus was a bit complex, but now it's much simpler. As a customer, I have clarity about it. That is something that helps us to serve the business better.

I have not been directly involved in price negotiations but my understanding is that while the cost is a little bit high, it provides good value for the money.

The price is okay. You're able to buy it, as opposed to paying for a full year. You can just on-demand purchase it for your users for a day or two, which is nice in an MSP business like mine. If I need to use it for separate clients, I don't have to have a huge layout of capital upfront.

We have license files. The license is paid by what they call man-days, which is calculated based on the number of users that are needed and by the number of days they are going to use it for. In the MSP business, it makes it incredibly easy to use. We license it as we need it. If we use it for one client, and only need it once a year, the licensing cost for 500 users would be approximately US $2.50 per day, per user, so approximately US $1250.00 per day.

The solution needs to reduce licensing costs. Its main competition, for example, is free to use, so I'm sure it's rather difficult to compete with it on a cost level.

I'm not quite sure about the exact pricing because I do not handle that part of the business, but I think the Performance Center is quite expensive. It is more expensive than LoadRunner, although I am not sure how many controllers you can run for the same price. They said Performance Center was costing us around 40 million Krones and that is about 4 million dollars. But I think that was with ALM (Application Lifecycle Management) as well and not only for Performance Center.