We performed a comparison between Appium and OpenText UFT One based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Regression Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Appium provides a record-and-play option, and the commands are the same as those that Selenium uses. So a person who has some exposure to Selenium will be able to write a piece of code in Appium."
"The way Appium server interacts with mobile apps is fantastic. It provides all the information about the elements inside the app, Android as well as iOS. I can interact with the element quickly, just type some text or get some text values from the element - whether it's a drop-down, or web text, or a native element."
"The most valuable feature of Appium is it supports iOS and AOS and is open-source."
"It has great documentation and excellent community support."
"The automation part is extremely helpful in streamlining our processes."
"It runs completely flawlessly and seamlessly every day."
"The library is extensive so the driver interacts with most functions or actions on mobile devices."
"The most valuable features of Appium are the in-built functionality, which we can use in our code. For example, move back, move front, navigate one page before, and navigate one page ahead. You can do this by using the in-built functions from Appium."
"The solution has good out-of-the-box protocols."
"It's easy to use for beginners and non-technical people."
"It is easy to automate and new personnel can start learning automation using UFT One. You don't have to learn any scripting."
"Compared to other products, UFT One is better, faster, and more accurate."
"This product is easy to use, understand, and maintain."
"The most valuable feature for me is that it works on multiple platforms and technologies."
"I like the fact that you can record and play the record of your step scripts, and UFT One creates the steps for you in the code base. After that, you can alter the code, and it's more of a natural language code."
"The scalability of Micro Focus UFT One is good."
"Appium could improve by enabling record and run techniques similar to what they have in other licensing tools, such as Micro Focus. We have to all write the code, and then we can proceed."
"I rarely use Appium nowadays because I'm now at the managerial level, but the last time I used it, whenever I selected and clicked on an element, Appium was very slow. I tried to debug it, but I still couldn't find the problem, so this is an area for improvement in the solution. Another area for improvement lies with the connector and server. For example, the effort to get into the local machine sometimes causes the emulator to become slow, which then leads to failure in testing, and this is the usual issue I've encountered from Appium. An additional feature I'd like added to Appium in its next release is being able to do automation in iOS without using XPath and the name of the element. In Xcode, you can use previous UI tests for detecting elements, but in Appium, you have to use Xpath and the element name instead of being able to directly put the X-UiPath, which is what you can do in Xcode. In iOS as well, sometimes the element doesn't have a name or a path. Sometimes, there's also no element."
"Configuration-wise, there is a lot of room for improvement."
"They should add an in-built framework."
"One thing which can be really helpful is that there is some kind of a recorder made available rather than scripting everything."
"Image recognition could be improved. We have some images in our mobile applications. It should be able to run from the cloud, so we can automate the catcher."
"Support-wise, it could be better."
"The user interface needs improvement because there are issues when setting up environment variables."
"The price is very high. They should work to lower the costs for their clients."
"I would like to have detailed description provided to test the cloud-based applications."
"The artificial intelligence functionality is applicable only on the web, and it should be expanded to cover non-web applications as well."
"They need to reduce the licensing cost. There's pushback from customers because of the cost."
"Micro Focus UFT One could improve by having more maintenance. Every time when we run the solution and develop something, the next time when we run it it doesn't recognize the object. I have to redesign the object again and then run the solution. It's really a headache, it's not consistent."
"The product doesn't provide free training for the basic features."
"The overall design needs an entire overhaul. We prefer software designed to ensure the package isn't too loaded."
"I'd like to see UFT integrated more with some of the open source tools like Selenium, where web is involved."
Appium is ranked 5th in Regression Testing Tools with 25 reviews while OpenText UFT One is ranked 2nd in Regression Testing Tools with 89 reviews. Appium is rated 8.0, while OpenText UFT One is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Appium writes "It's easy to launch applications". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText UFT One writes "With regularly occurring releases, a QA team member can schedule tests, let the tests run unattended, and then examine the results". Appium is most compared with Katalon Studio, Tricentis Tosca, Perfecto, Xamarin Platform and Mendix, whereas OpenText UFT One is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText UFT Developer, Katalon Studio, SmartBear TestComplete and Selenium HQ. See our Appium vs. OpenText UFT One report.
See our list of best Regression Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Regression Testing 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.