We performed a comparison between Micro Focus UFT Developer and Micro Focus UFT One based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Micro Focus UFT One ranks higher in this comparison. It is more up-to-date and provides for better integration with many of today's popular solutions and technologies.
"One aspect that I like about Micro Focus UFT Developer is the ability to integrate it into a testing framework as a library."
"The most valuable feature is stability."
"The most valuable feature for me is the number of protocols that can be tested. It not only tests Web, but also SAP, Siebel, .Net, and even pdf."
"The solution helps to accelerate software testing automation. It will help to reduce lead time and increase productivity and efficiency."
"It is quite stable, and it has got very user-friendly features, which are important in terms of maintaining our scripts from a long-term perspective. It is very stable for desktop-based, UI-based, and mobile applications. Object repositories and other features are also quite good."
"There are many good things. Like it is intuitive and scripting was easy. Plus the availability of experienced resources in India due to its market leadership."
"It is a product that can meet regulations of the banking industry."
"The most valuable feature of Micro Focus UFT Developer is the flexibility to work with many different types of software."
"It offers a wide range of testing."
"One advantage of Micro Focus UFT is that it is more compatible with SAP, Desktop ECC SAP, than S/4HANA."
"It is a stable solution."
"Has improved our organization by allowing us to obtain fast, detailed information about the behavior of our products and to supply this to the customer, enabling us to work together without the need for special programming knowledge."
"The most valuable features for us are the GUI, the easy identification of objects, and folder structure creation."
"With frequent releases, using automation to perform regression testing can save us huge amount of time and resources."
"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."
"The most valuable feature of Micro Focus UFT One is you are able to use it with many other technologies. I have not had an instance where the solution was not able to automate or execute automation. I was able to use COBOL to manage some automation."
"UFT Developer is good, but it requires high-level development skills. Scripting is something that everybody should know to be able to work with this product. Currently, it is very development intensive, and you need to know various scripting languages. It would be good if the development effort could be cut short, and it can be scriptless like Tosca. It will help in more adoption because not every team has people with a software engineering background. If it is scriptless, the analysts who wear multiple hats and come from different backgrounds can also use it in a friendly manner. It is also quite expensive."
"Easier connectivity and integration with SAP would be helpful."
"It is unstable, expensive, inflexible, and has poor support."
"The support for .NET Framework and Visual Studio in Micro Focus UFT Developer is currently limited. At present, only Visual Studio 2019 is supported, despite the release of a newer version (2022). Similarly, the tool only supports up to .NET Framework version 4.3.8, while there have been six newer versions released. This is an area that could be improved upon, particularly in the Windows environment."
"It would be improved by adding a drag-and-drop interface to help alleviate the coding."
"I have to keep the remote machine open while the tests are running, otherwise, it leads to instability."
"UFT is like a flagship of testing tools, but it's too expensive and people are not using it so much. They should work on their pricing to make themselves more competitive."
"It's now too heavy and they should be making it faster. We do an attempt at automatic regression testing. We schedule a test to start at a certain time. It takes a lot of time to download the resources and start UFT. Competitors in this area have tools that start faster and run the test faster. For example, if the test at our side will take 10 minutes, another tool will do that in one minute."
"They need to reduce the licensing cost. There's pushback from customers because of the cost."
"The overall design needs an entire overhaul. We prefer software designed to ensure the package isn't too loaded."
"The artificial intelligence functionality is applicable only on the web, and it should be expanded to cover non-web applications as well."
"Scripting has become more complex from a maintenance standpoint to support additional browsers."
"The solution is expensive."
"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'd like to see test case-related reports included in the solution."
"It should consume less CPU, and the licensing cost could be lower."
OpenText UFT Developer is ranked 16th in Functional Testing Tools with 34 reviews while OpenText UFT One is ranked 2nd in Functional Testing Tools with 89 reviews. OpenText UFT Developer is rated 7.4, while OpenText UFT One is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of OpenText UFT Developer writes "Integrates well, has LeanFT library, and good object detection ". 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 UFT Developer is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText Silk Test, froglogic Squish, Original Software TestDrive and Selenium HQ, whereas OpenText UFT One is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, SmartBear TestComplete, UiPath Test Suite and Ranorex Studio. See our OpenText UFT Developer vs. OpenText UFT One report.
See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors, best Test Automation 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.
Hi Subhash.
Both tools can:
UFT One - allows you to automate functional and regression testing for the widest range of applications and technologies can supports testing GUI, web, mobile or API applications.
UFT Developer - is powerful and lightweight functional automation software for Agile and DevOps teams, built specifically for continuous testing and continuous integration. It allows you to create tests in your favourite IDEs and to write robust and reusable test automation scripts using JavaScript, Java or C#. Get fast feedback from your test execution with the lightweight but detailed results report.
UFT One includes a licence to UFT Developer.
If you don't need the additional support in UFT One, the UFT Developer is the tool you need.