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."The interface is fine and there is nothing else to add in terms of enhancement."
"Being able to automate different applications makes day-to-day activities a lot easier."
"The inside object repository is nice. We can use that and learn it through the ALM connection. That's a good feature. The reporting and smart identification features are also excellent."
"One advantage of Micro Focus UFT is that it is more compatible with SAP, Desktop ECC SAP, than S/4HANA."
"The high-level security, high standard and compatible SAP are great."
"It's simple to set up."
"This product is easy to use, understand, and maintain."
"For traditional automation, approximately half of our tests end up automated. Therefore, we are saving half the testing time by pushing it off to automation. That gives it an intrinsic benefit of more time for manual testers and business testers to work on possibly more important and interesting things. For some of our applications, they don't just have to do happy path testing anymore, they can go more in-depth and breadth into the process."
"The graphics are very intuitive and it's very easy to get scale of development."
"The function test feature is valuable."
"The most valuable feature is the object identification feature."
"The most valuable features are functional testing and the central repository that contains various scripts."
"The solution is scalable."
"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."
"We find the front-end interface of this solution to be very user-friendly, meaning easy navigation even for novice users."
"We like that we don't need a separate management tool. This is a good feature. It also has an inbuilt performance tool which is on Flash. It has very good record and playback feature as well. The inspection tool is also very good. Overall, since it comes with all the three packages, it's very good."
"Scripting has become more complex from a maintenance standpoint to support additional browsers."
"The UA objects are sometimes hard to recognize, so the coverage should be increased. Open-source alternatives have a broad scope. Also, it's sometimes difficult to make connections between two of the components in the UFT mobile center. It should be easier to set up the wireless solution because we have to set both. We directly integrate Selenium and APM, so we should try to cover all the features they have in APM and Selenium with the UFT mobile."
"Needs to improve the integration with the CI/CD pipeline (VSTS and report generation)."
"Sometimes UFT can take a while to open and sometimes will run slower than expected."
"We have had some issues with stability, where it crashes sometimes."
"It doesn't support Telerik UI controls and we are currently looking for a patch for this."
"Perhaps more coverage as far as different languages go. I'm talking more about object identification."
"Technical support could be improved."
"Oracle Application Testing Suite could improve by offering desktop-based application automation. It is lacking in this area at the moment."
"It needs to be compatible with all browsers."
"To provide test automation support for other products like SAP, Windows and Java Applications when it comes to Functional Test Automation testing."
"The pathfinding at times is slow when we are using it. The tool's performance can be improved."
"Oracle Application Testing Suite does encounter some lag. When I am trying to record something, the tool gets stuck."
"We would like to see the instruction documentation made into video or audio formats, to help new users get used to the modules."
"Lacks patches for new OS systems and doesn't work on a Mac."
"The dashboards need to be simplified and made more user-friendly."
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.