We performed a comparison between Appium and OpenText UFT Digital Lab based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about OutSystems, Mendix, Salesforce and others in Mobile Development Platforms."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."
"It runs completely flawlessly and seamlessly every day."
"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."
"Obviously because of automation, it reduces manual testing efforts."
"We develop apps using the React Native framework, and Appium integrates well for testing those apps. The Appium automation framework also has good integration with GitHub Actions and plenty of other tools and frameworks, including BrowserStack."
"The automation part is extremely helpful in streamlining our processes."
"It's an open-source solution with a very large community and available documentation."
"We do not need to pay for the solution. It’s free."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is virtualization."
"The fact that it allows users to test on real mobile devices instead of emulators is something that projects have told us is beyond compare."
"For automation testing, the tool provides the record and playback option, which helps with object detection easily."
"The solution is easy to use. There are features to orchestrate mobile testing, including mobile testing automation. You can test different devices at the same time."
"It is a complete solution for mobile application testing."
"There are numerous valuable features such as automation, the ones that facilitate importing and synchronization capabilities between our platform, Jira, and Azure DevOps."
"The product is easy to use."
"Configuration-wise, there is a lot of room for improvement."
"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."
"An application developed on the Unity platform, such as a gaming application, objects are moving in that case. Interacting with those elements is still lacking in Appium. Appium doesn't have the internal library to play with the Unity platform. That is a huge lack right now."
"Stability is an area that needs some improvement."
"We haven't been able to fully leverage Appium for multiple reasons. I think number one is just that the tests take a long time to run. We have had some issues around just the results themselves and how predictable they are, but those are not issues with Appium directly."
"The tool needs to add a dependency manager."
"If it had more facility for configuration it would be a spectacular solution."
"We need some bug fixes for nested elements."
"I would like to see more integration with automation tools."
"They should introduce a pay-per-use subscription model."
"The product's object detection method needs to be improved since it can help testers do perfect testing."
"The documentation and user interface both need improvement."
"We like to host the tools centrally. We would need them to be multi-tenants, so different projects could log on and have their own set of devices and their own set of apps, and they wouldn't see data from other projects that are using it."
"For the most part, the key challenge is ensuring that customers fully utilize the product as intended and adopt the appropriate frameworks to implement the solutions effectively."
"We need to scale devices easily. Some customers would like to loop in AWS or other cloud providers to check if their devices have the cloud factor. OpenText UFT Digital Lab needs to improve it."
Appium is ranked 7th in Mobile Development Platforms with 25 reviews while OpenText UFT Digital Lab is ranked 6th in Mobile App Testing Tools with 16 reviews. Appium is rated 8.0, while OpenText UFT Digital Lab is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of Appium writes "It's easy to launch applications". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText UFT Digital Lab writes "Robust solution for application lifecycle management with numerous valuable features". Appium is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, Perfecto, Xamarin Platform and Ranorex Studio, whereas OpenText UFT Digital Lab is most compared with OpenText UFT One, Perfecto, AWS Device Farm, Sauce Labs and Tricentis Tosca.
We monitor all Mobile Development Platforms 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.
