We performed a comparison between OpenText Silk Central and Visual Studio Test Professional based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText, Microsoft, IDERA and others in Test Management Tools."The stability of this solution is very good. In our experience it is approximately ninety-nine percent."
"The product is good to create big or small projects fastly. It is one of the leaders in the area."
"The most valuable feature is the in-built support for C# and .NET projects."
"Visual Studio is an exemplary integrated development environment that stands out due to its exceptional features. It allows for the seamless selection of the appropriate programming language for the specific development tasks at hand. This facilitates a swift and effortless transition between languages, providing a highly efficient development experience."
"The documentation is easy, and it helps us solve our problems."
"It is a good and user-friendly tool."
"It is very easy to use. You can handle a lot of things together at once in one package, which is a good point for us."
"What I like most about Visual Studio Test Professional is the way people publish templates and publish integration."
"The tool has highly detailed debugging features."
"We would also like to manage the integration testing end-to-end."
"It is not good in terms of performance. When you open Visual Studio, you have to wait for a while to process your code. It uses a lot of resources and has a lot of features. If we could disable some of the features, it would be lighter and faster to use. Nowadays, for some of the projects, we use VS Code for JavaScript or Python. VS Code is very light and easy to use, whereas, in Visual Studio, we have to wait because it takes time to compile or run a project. It has a lot of competitors in terms of performance, such as Intelligent ID. Intelligent ID is very easy to use. It has many features, and it is lighter to use than Visual Studio. In terms of error handling, sometimes, it shows an error before you finish your code, which can be improved. It would be good if it has a version for Linux. I use VS Code on Linux, but I am not sure if Visual Studio has a version for Linux."
"The database administration could be better; you should be able to choose new tools with the development environment in Visual Studio. It could be easier to use."
"Enhancing the support for web application testing and load performance would be an improvement."
"The solution can improve the startup time."
"The performance could be faster."
"Visual Studio Test Professional needs to improve its stability."
"Over the years, I haven't identified any specific enhancements that I desire; Visual Studio has consistently met my requirements seamlessly and flawlessly."
"The data flow can be improved."
More Visual Studio Test Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
OpenText Silk Central is ranked 20th in Test Management Tools while Visual Studio Test Professional is ranked 5th in Test Management Tools with 46 reviews. OpenText Silk Central is rated 7.8, while Visual Studio Test Professional is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of OpenText Silk Central writes "We have many possibilities to customize the utilization and we can also work easily at database level for custom reporting and to manage additional information and integration". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Visual Studio Test Professional writes "Customization is a key feature as is the ability to integrate with third-party services ". OpenText Silk Central is most compared with OpenText ALM / Quality Center and Zephyr Enterprise, whereas Visual Studio Test Professional is most compared with TFS, Apache JMeter, Tricentis NeoLoad, SmartBear TestComplete and OpenText UFT One.
See our list of best Test Management Tools vendors.
We monitor all Test Management 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.