We performed a comparison between OpenText UFT Developer and UiPath Test Suite based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Test Automation Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature is the automation of test cases."
"The solution is very scalable."
"The cost is the most important factor in this tool."
"It is a product that can meet regulations of the banking industry."
"The most valuable features are the object repository."
"There are many good things. Like it is intuitive and scripting was easy. Plus the availability of experienced resources in India due to its market leadership."
"Integrates well with other products."
"The solution helps to accelerate software testing automation. It will help to reduce lead time and increase productivity and efficiency."
"It facilitates the delegation of control to multiple users and offers an efficient way to organize tasks using labels."
"Test Suite has multiple tools that are fully integrated. It has everything you need to record your test cases, generate your documentation, and integrate synthetic data with your Orchestrator. I like the integrated aspect of it. The biggest advantage of UiPath is that it not only tests but also integrates with all the other services to offer a complete package."
"UiPath's most valuable features are reusability and low-code aspects. It works across both desktop and web applications."
"It's effective at testing whatever automation we've built or making sure the automation we've built is working fine."
"It is a very scalable product."
"The document understanding is good."
"We are finding bugs and defects much faster."
"The console, in a single pane, allows us to understand where we are in the testing environment."
"It would be improved by adding a drag-and-drop interface to help alleviate the coding."
"We push one button and the tests are completely executed at once, so just have to analyze and say it's okay. It would be nice if this could be entirely automated."
"The support from Micro Focus needs a lot of improvement."
"The price of the solution could improve."
"Easier connectivity and integration with SAP would be helpful."
"The parallel execution of the tests needs improvement. When we are running tests in LeanFT, there are some limitations in terms of running the same tests simultaneously across different browsers. If I'm running a test, let's say to log in, I should be able to execute it through IE, through Microsoft Edge, through Chrome, through Mozilla, etc. This capability doesn't exist in LeanFT. Parallel execution of the test cases across different browsers need to be added."
"I have to keep the remote machine open while the tests are running, otherwise, it leads to instability."
"It's now too heavy and they should be making it faster. We do an attempt at automatic regression testing. We schedule a test to start at a certain time. It takes a lot of time to download the resources and start UFT. Competitors in this area have tools that start faster and run the test faster. For example, if the test at our side will take 10 minutes, another tool will do that in one minute."
"We'd like to see the solution integrate with more code or local frameworks."
"With Selenium, there is a plugin called Healenium, which helps automatically detect changed properties of objects. With one click, it automatically updates the object repository with the changed properties. I would like UiPath to add that capability."
"We have output arguments in the workflow. We can check results only by using those arguments. It would be better to have some more options, such as screen variables. For example, in a workflow, if we want to check if an activity is present inside, we should be able to get the output to UiPath Test Suite through the activity itself. That would be great for testing."
"We are facing problems specifically with Desk Manager."
"UiPath’s Test Suite manual testing doesn’t work for our organization based on how the QA Analysts do their manual testing and the artifacts that are needed for deployment."
"Storing the test scripts is what needs to improve in the UiPath Test Suite, as it's currently a challenge to some extent. Maintaining the files is a bit challenging, especially when you need to keep those locally."
"Orchestrator is not easy to use or understand."
"Our primary application is built on Windows, so we've faced no significant challenges. However, I think mobile automation is one area where the solution still needs some work."
OpenText UFT Developer is ranked 15th in Test Automation Tools with 34 reviews while UiPath Test Suite is ranked 6th in Test Automation Tools with 17 reviews. OpenText UFT Developer is rated 7.4, while UiPath Test Suite is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of OpenText UFT Developer writes "Integrates well, has LeanFT library, and good object detection ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of UiPath Test Suite writes "Can be used by non-developers, and saves us time, but the manual testing needs improvement". OpenText UFT Developer is most compared with OpenText UFT One, Tricentis Tosca, OpenText Silk Test, Original Software TestDrive and Parasoft SOAtest, whereas UiPath Test Suite is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText UFT One, SmartBear TestComplete, froglogic Squish and Ranorex Studio. See our OpenText UFT Developer vs. UiPath Test Suite report.
See our list of best Test Automation Tools vendors.
We monitor all Test Automation Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
