Subhash Pasupuleti - PeerSpot reviewer
Framework Architect and Test Automation Specialist at NJ Judiciary
  • 2
  • 75

Which product supports Cross Browser Testing: UFT Developer or UFT One?

I need to choose a product that supports Cross-Browser Testing on Edge, Chrome and IE. Which of these two Micro Focus products (Micro Focus UFT Developer, Micro Focus UFT One) can do this?


PeerSpot user
2 Answers
Founder and CEO with 1-10 employees
Real User
Top 20
Jan 11, 2021

Hi Subhash.

Both tools can:

UFT One - allows you to automate functional and regression testing for the widest range of applications and technologies can supports testing GUI, web, mobile or API applications.

UFT Developer - is powerful and lightweight functional automation software for Agile and DevOps teams, built specifically for continuous testing and continuous integration.  It allows you to create tests in your favourite IDEs and to write robust and reusable test automation scripts using JavaScript, Java or C#. Get fast feedback from your test execution with the lightweight but detailed results report.

UFT One includes a licence to UFT Developer.

If you don't need the additional support in UFT One, the UFT Developer is the tool you need.

Product comparison that may be of interest to you
Diego Caicedo Lescano - PeerSpot reviewer
Chief Innovation Officer at SAGGA
Real User
Dec 1, 2021

UFT One is the one you need.

Find out what your peers are saying about Micro Focus UFT Developer vs. Micro Focus UFT One and other solutions. Updated: November 2022.
653,757 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Related Questions
Netanya Carmi - PeerSpot reviewer
Content Manager at PeerSpot (formerly IT Central Station)
Nov 11, 2022
How does Micro Focus UFT One compare to Tricentis Tosca? Which is better and why?
See 2 answers
Nov 2, 2021
We reviewed MicroFocus UFT One but ultimately chose to use Tricentis Tosca because we needed API testing. MicroFocus UFT is a performance and functional testing tool. We tested it, and it was well suited for CI integrations. We liked it, in particular, because it integrates greatly with other platforms, like .net, QC and Jenkins. An added advantage was the multi-device support. One of the best advantages of MicroFocus is that it integrates with legacy web technologies and even Windows client applications. Finally, MicroFocus supports cross-browser testing. Regardless of many features, including a test combinations generator and insight recording, it is relatively easy to learn. That being said, it doesn’t support multiple formats of reporting. For now, UFT only supports exporting reports in HTML or PDF. MicroFocus should allow exporting to Excel, CSV, XML, and other formats. There is a bit of performance degradation of the test environment when executing automation scripts continuously for a long time. The execution can be inconsistent sometimes, and scripting takes a long time. Another downside is the high licensing price. Tricentis Tosca is an integrated testing solution that includes testing automation and case design approach, risk-based testing, test data management, and service virtualization. The best feature is its versatility in helping both web and desktop applications. It is very reliable and stable. Another great feature is that you can reuse test cases. The platform supports multiple technologies and devices. It is truly end-to-end. Because it is scriptless, anyone can learn to use it. As much as we like it, there are downsides to Tosca, too. The price is one of them. It runs a bit expensive, but it is worth it. The test design section is complicated to learn, and the UI takes time to get used to. Conclusions Tosca is a better solution in terms of usability and versatility. MicroFocus is better for organizations with legacy web applications.
Kevin Copple - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr. Quality Assurance Project Manager at iLAB LLC.
Nov 11, 2022
Both products are very useful but it really depends on what you need to test and who is building the tests.  We recently chose UFT One over Tosca in a specific use case where identifying images inside a map was needed.  UFT uses both OCR and Image recognition where in Tosca you would have to identify specific pixels and those pixels could move depending on what device you were using.   From a test building perspective, I feel it is easier to build tests in UFT One than in Tosca.  UFT One also gives you the ability to develop tests by either writing code or using the record and convert to code option (Allows developers and Business users to work together to build/update the same test).   If you can provide more info on what you are testing and your key drivers, I can try and give more info on what tool may be best.
it_user434868 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Director of Delivery at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Oct 19, 2022
Hi, We all know it's really hard to get good pricing and cost information. Please share what you can so you can help your peers.
2 out of 11 answers
Vishwa-Reddy - PeerSpot reviewer
Test Automation Eng Senior Analyst at Accenture
Jun 30, 2020
This solution is quite costly and there is no free trial available. We purchased it from SAP because we got a cheaper price. The subscription fees are paid annually.
Dolf Cornelius - PeerSpot reviewer
Owner at a consultancy with self employed
Jul 5, 2020
The licensing costs are quite high. The more you do automation, the more you spend on the license cost. Due to that, sometimes when there is a boom in spending, you will need to justify the extra cost.
Download Free Report
Download our FREE report comparing Micro Focus UFT Developer and Micro Focus UFT One based on reviews, features, and more! Updated: November 2022.
653,757 professionals have used our research since 2012.