We performed a comparison between OpenText ALM / Quality Center and OpenText UFT One based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Atlassian, Nutanix and others in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites."Defect management is very good."
"The most valuable feature is the ST Add-In. It's a Microsoft add-in that makes it much easier to upload test cases into Quality Center."
"The solution's support team was always there to help."
"You can do your development from start to finish: starting with the requirements, ending with defects, and testing in-between."
"ALM is a well-known product and is one of the pioneers in providing test management facilities with a 360 degree view of requirements."
"The enhanced dashboards capabilities are useful for senior management to view the progress of releases under the portfolio in one go and also drill down to the graphs."
"So the first impression that hits me about HP UFT 14.0 (formerly QTP) is that it seems to be a whole lot faster! But that could be subjective, as I'm running it on a high end gaming system."
"It allows us to easily make linkage and dependencies, with plenty of integrations."
"The initial setup is relatively easy."
"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."
"Micro Focus UFT One is a great tool and can be used in a variety of ways."
"UFT is very strongly built. It's widely used, so there's a lot of support."
"One advantage of Micro Focus UFT is that it is more compatible with SAP, Desktop ECC SAP, than S/4HANA."
"The ease of record and playback as well as descriptive programming are the most valuable features of UFT (QTP)."
"This product is easy to use, understand, and maintain."
"The interface is fine and there is nothing else to add in terms of enhancement."
"ALM Quality Center could be improved with more techniques to manage Agile processes."
"Certain applications within this solution are not really compatible with certain applications like ERP. The problem is when we're trying to use these applications or devices, the solution itself doesn't scale."
"ALM requires that you install client side components. If your organization does not allow admin rights on your local machine, this means you will need someone to run the installation for you with admin rights. This client side install is also limited to Internet Explorer and does not support any other browsers."
"There needs to be improvement in the requirement samples. At the moment, they are very basic."
"The QA needs improvement."
"The version of Micro Focus ALM that we use only works through Internet Explorer (IE). We have to communicate to everyone that they can only use IE with the solution. This is a big limitation. We should be free to use any type of browser or operating system. We have customers and partners who are unable to log into the system and enter their defects because they work on a different operating system."
"It is pricey."
"There's room for improvement on the reporting side of things and the scheduling, in general, is a bit clunky."
"I am not sure if they have a vision of how they want to position the leads in the market, because if you look at Tosca, Tosca is one of the automation tools that have a strategy, and it recently updated its strategy with SAP. They are positioning them as a type of continuous testing automation tool. And if you notice Worksoft, particularly the one tool for your enterprise application, your Worksoft is positioning. I am not sure if Micro Focus UFT has a solid strategy in place. They must differentiate themselves so that people recognize Micro Focus UFT for that reason."
"The overall design needs an entire overhaul. We prefer software designed to ensure the package isn't too loaded."
"It could work with more browsers other than Internet Explorer, and could better handle new things like Ext JS."
"The product should evolve to be flexible so one can use any programming language such as Java and C#, and not just VB script."
"[Tech support is] not a 10 because what happens with some of our issues is that we might not get a patch quickly and we have to hold on to an application until we get a proper solution."
"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."
"There is a lot of room for improvement when it comes to friction-free continuous testing across the software life cycle, as a local installation is required to run UFT."
"Object identification has room for improvement, to make it more efficient."
More OpenText ALM / Quality Center Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText ALM / Quality Center is ranked 6th in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites with 197 reviews while OpenText UFT One is ranked 2nd in Functional Testing Tools with 89 reviews. OpenText ALM / Quality Center is rated 8.0, while OpenText UFT One is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of OpenText ALM / Quality Center writes "Offers features for higher-end traceability and integration with different tools but lacks in scalability ". 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". OpenText ALM / Quality Center is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, OpenText ALM Octane, Jira, Tricentis qTest and Tricentis Tosca, whereas OpenText UFT One is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText UFT Developer, Katalon Studio, SmartBear TestComplete and OpenText Silk Test.
We monitor all Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites 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.
