We performed a comparison between OpenText UFT One and Postman based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two API 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."
"Record and Replay to ease onboarding of new users."
"I like the fact that you can record and play the record of your step scripts, and UFT One creates the steps for you in the code base. After that, you can alter the code, and it's more of a natural language code."
"On a scale of one to ten, I would give OpenText UFT One a 10 because it is a reliable product, it works, it's as good or better than similar solutions especially because you get technical support from real people. Additionally, upgrades are always provided on a consistent basis."
"It offers a wide range of testing."
"We have used it for the web and Windows-based applications. It is very productive in terms of execution."
"It is easy to automate and new personnel can start learning automation using UFT One. You don't have to learn any scripting."
"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."
"Postman is open-source and free to use."
"Good at simulating the API code from a fictitious client application to check API behavior."
"It allowed us to understand the working and performance of the APIs."
"It is stable and reliable."
"It is easy and simple to use and install. It is compatible with Linux, Mac or Windows."
"It is a stable solution."
"It is nice to have different workspaces. You have your personal workspace, and then you have a team workspace. In general, I like its UI. It is quite cool."
"The most valuable feature is that JavaScript can be included as tests."
"They should include AI-based testing features."
"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."
"Micro Focus UFT One could benefit from creating modules that are more accessible to non-technical users. Without a developer background or at least basic knowledge of VBScript, using Micro Focus UFT One may not be feasible for everyone. This is something that Micro Focus, now owned by OpenText, should consider in order to cater to business professionals as well. While Micro Focus UFT One does have a recording function, it still requires a certain level of IT proficiency to create effective automation, which may be challenging for those outside of the technical field."
"Needs to improve the integration with the CI/CD pipeline (VSTS and report generation)."
"They need to reduce the cost because it is pretty high. It's approximately $3,000 per user."
"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 want to see a significant improvement in the tool's features. The most significant enhancements are support for panel execution and integration with DevSecOps."
"We'd like it to have less scripting."
"Postman needs more advanced data-driven testing."
"I live in Turkey, so for me, the value of dollar currency is high...Postman can change its pricing policy and decrease the prices for Turkey."
"The solution has some user interface difficulties when conducting environment collections."
"If we have a certain build on one machine it won't work with another build even if we are using the same URL. It would give us a connection refuse. So developing environment compatibility would make it better."
"Integration of the solution towards Bitbucket, BitHub, and CI pipelines is difficult."
"I would like to see improvements in the maintenance of the scripts and their collections. It is really painful that the user cannot drag and drop. It was also painful to create the standard suite of operations for the product. I am not sure if this is improved in the tool’s latest versions. The maintenance of the complex scenarios prompted us to use the solution only for unit testing. In the future, we may switch to the k6 framework."
"They should provide more specific documentation on configuration."
"One area that could be better is collection management."
OpenText UFT One is ranked 4th in API Testing Tools with 89 reviews while Postman is ranked 1st in API Testing Tools with 52 reviews. OpenText UFT One is rated 8.0, while Postman is rated 8.2. 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 Postman writes "Reliable and easy to expand with a helpful API network". OpenText UFT One is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText UFT Developer, Katalon Studio, SmartBear TestComplete and Oracle Application Testing Suite, whereas Postman is most compared with Apache JMeter, ReadyAPI Test, Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio and Runscope. See our OpenText UFT One vs. Postman report.
See our list of best API Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all API 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.
