We performed a comparison between OpenText UFT One and Oracle Application Testing Suite based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Functional Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Hidden among the kitchen sink of features is a new Data Generation tool called the Test Combinations Generator."
"Micro Focus UFT One is a great tool and can be used in a variety of ways."
"The high-level security, high standard and compatible SAP are great."
"The best feature of UFT by far is its compatibility with a large variety of products, tools and technologies. It is currently a challenge to find a single tool on the market besides UFT that will successfully automate tests for so many projects and environments."
"The shared repositories can be used throughout all testing which makes jobs easier."
"This product is easy to use, understand, and maintain."
"Micro Focus UFT One gives us integration capabilities with both API and GUI components. I like the user interface. It doesn't require that much skill to use and has automatic settings, which is useful for users who don't know what to select. It also has dark and light themes."
"Compared to other products, UFT One is better, faster, and more accurate."
"Has good automation and load-testing capabilities."
"The most valuable features are functional testing and the central repository that contains various scripts."
"User friendly UI / Tree view to work with adding steps."
"We find the front-end interface of this solution to be very user-friendly, meaning easy navigation even for novice users."
"The graphics are very intuitive and it's very easy to get scale of development."
"OpenScript has many features that make it useful, including the ability to record and playback."
"We do not need a separate test management tool because we have there is a management tool. That is a very good feature. Secondly, it has an inbuilt performance testing tool, which is on flash. It has very good record and playback features as well. And apart from that, there is a good inspection feature. Since it comes with all of the packages, it's very good."
"I like the functional testing. There's a product inside OATS called OLT, Oracle Load Testing. You can do the load testing without depending on any other tool"
"We have had some issues with stability, where it crashes sometimes."
"The product wasn't easy for developers to learn and pick up in the area revolving around scripting for automation, and there was a lot of resistance from developers, causing my company to rely on specialist resources."
"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."
"The product should evolve to be flexible so one can use any programming language such as Java and C#, and not just VB script."
"It should consume less CPU, and the licensing cost could be lower."
"The price is very high. They should work to lower the costs for their clients."
"We used to run it as a test suite. Micro Focus provides that in terms of a test management tool as ALM, but when we think of integrating with a distributed version control system, like Jenkins, there isn't much integration available. That means we need to make use of external solutions to make it work."
"Object identification has room for improvement, to make it more efficient."
"The pathfinding at times is slow when we are using it. The tool's performance can be improved."
"I would like to see better dashboards."
"We would like to see the instruction documentation made into video or audio formats, to help new users get used to the modules."
"Licensing policies could be more intuitive."
"Oracle Application Testing Suite does encounter some lag. When I am trying to record something, the tool gets stuck."
"I have faced issues with some indexing items."
"The dashboards need to be simplified and made more user-friendly."
"It needs to be compatible with all browsers."
More Oracle Application Testing Suite Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText UFT One is ranked 2nd in Functional Testing Tools with 89 reviews while Oracle Application Testing Suite is ranked 13th in Functional Testing Tools with 24 reviews. OpenText UFT One is rated 8.0, while Oracle Application Testing Suite is rated 7.8. 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". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Oracle Application Testing Suite writes "Requires little maintenance, is stable, and easy to deploy". OpenText UFT One is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText UFT Developer, Katalon Studio, SmartBear TestComplete and OpenText UFT Digital Lab, whereas Oracle Application Testing Suite is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, Apache JMeter, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud and Tricentis NeoLoad. See our OpenText UFT One vs. Oracle Application Testing Suite report.
See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors and best Regression Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Functional 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.