We performed a comparison between HeadSpin and OpenText UFT One based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Mobile App Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature is that this is the first connected intelligence all-in-one platform."
"The initial setup of HeadSpin was very easy and user-friendly. It was easy to configure and write a script."
"It has an interesting feature called AV box testing. A lot of companies that are in the OTT segment don't really understand what their streaming is like. They can't test for streaming quality. There are restrictions where you cannot simulate live streaming. For example, on Netflix, you can't simulate how a movie is being streamed on a remote device. That's why HeadSpin has got this AV box testing feature. It is a patented feature. They send an AV box to your location, and you can test live streaming, which is something that no other company does."
"The most valuable feature of HeadSpin it's the integration with other solutions. It is great. I can search for an element or do a quick debugging on the application right on HeadSpin. It's very useful."
"The most valuable features of the product are the performance parameters it gives us."
"The technical support is really helpful because we can set up direct calls with them if we want to. We can use Zoom or Google Meet to interact with them directly, and if there is an issue in our system, they will help us by reproducing the issue in their machines and trying to figure out a solution. The support is really smooth, and we like that they're very supportive."
"My company has not had an issue with OpenText UFT One since we have been using it for the past three to four years."
"The most valuable features for us are the GUI, the easy identification of objects, and folder structure creation."
"I like the Help feature in UFT One. For example, if you are navigating a particular window, where there are different options. One wouldn’t know the purpose of every option, but there is no need to search because that window contains a Help button. If you click on that Help button, it directly navigates to the respective help needed. VBScript is very easy to understand and easy to prepare scripts with minimal learning curve."
"It helps in identifying defects earlier. With manual testing, that 15-day timeline meant there were times when we would find defects on the 11th or 12th day of the cycle, but with automation we are able to run the complete suite within a day and we are able to find the failures. It helps us to provide early feedback."
"It is easy to automate and new personnel can start learning automation using UFT One. You don't have to learn any scripting."
"This product is easy to use, understand, and maintain."
"UFT is very strongly built. It's widely used, so there's a lot of support."
"Compared to other products, UFT One is better, faster, and more accurate."
"Support and pricing could be improved."
"They should automate their onboarding. A lot of things are still manual. They can create a video assistant or something like that to completely automate the entire process."
"HeadSpin needs to improve the hardware. With the mobile, the battery life reduces and must be continuously charged."
"Sometimes, devices go offline and some features are not functioning on some devices, specifically on iOS."
"HeadSpin could improve on the user interface because it is very poor. The checks that are done on the iOS devices are very difficult, but for Android, it runs great. For all iOS devices, the user interface and how it interacts with the device are very poor."
"If you want to do some testing or check the devices manually or check the application in a particular device manually, it is really laggy. That's a disappointment because sometimes we would like to do manual testing when our local devices are not available."
"I would like to have detailed description provided to test the cloud-based applications."
"It could work with more browsers other than Internet Explorer, and could better handle new things like Ext JS."
"We'd like it to have less scripting."
"The scripting language could be improved. They're currently using Visual Basic, but I think that people need something more advanced, like Python or Java."
"I would like Micro Focus to provide more information on their portal about their newer products. The information about UFT One was outdated. The image recognition features could also be better."
"The artificial intelligence functionality is applicable only on the web, and it should be expanded to cover non-web applications as well."
"You have to deal with issues such as the firewall and how can the tool talk with the application, i.e., if the application is on a company network and so on. That, of course, is important to figure out."
"One thing that confused me, and now just mildly irritates me, is that we migrated from QuickTest Pro to HP UFT, Unified Functional Test. After we did the migration, it turned out that we didn't really have Unified Functional Test at all."
HeadSpin is ranked 7th in Mobile App Testing Tools with 6 reviews while OpenText UFT One is ranked 2nd in Mobile App Testing Tools with 89 reviews. HeadSpin is rated 8.0, while OpenText UFT One is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of HeadSpin writes "It fulfills everything from automation to manual performance". 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". HeadSpin is most compared with Perfecto, BrowserStack, Sauce Labs, pCloudy and AWS Device Farm, whereas OpenText UFT One is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText UFT Developer, Katalon Studio, SmartBear TestComplete and UiPath Test Suite. See our HeadSpin vs. OpenText UFT One report.
See our list of best Mobile App Testing Tools vendors and best Functional Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Mobile App 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.