We performed a comparison between OpenText UFT Developer and Visual Studio Test Professional 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."This tool is really good. We don't need to write any code, but it writes the code itself, only record and play. And it is simple, and it is not heavy; I mean, it doesn't have a large footprint, and it works well for us."
"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 most valuable feature for UFT is the ability to test a desktop application."
"Integrates well with other products."
"The cost is the most important factor in this tool."
"It is a product that can meet regulations of the banking industry."
"The most valuable features are the object repository."
"It's a complete pursuit and it's a logical pursuit working with HPE."
"Visual Studio Test Professional is a user-friendly solution."
"The most valuable feature of Visual Studio Test Professional is its ease of use."
"We are satisfied with technical support. Communicating with them is very simple. We also have a lot of online resources to check and to study and to train our team with. The documentation is very clear and readily available."
"The solution is very useful for compiling existing projects and developing new projects."
"The ability to quickly make your own components has been valuable."
"Visual Studio Test Professional's most valuable feature is the rich IDE for doing code and test development."
"The most valuable features are tools like IntelliSense and ReSharper."
"Visual Studio Test Pro is super helpful for my Microsoft app work."
"It would be improved by adding a drag-and-drop interface to help alleviate the coding."
"The product has shown no development over the past 10 or 15 years."
"We push one button and the tests are completely executed at once, so just have to analyze and say it's okay. It would be nice if this could be entirely automated."
"Easier connectivity and integration with SAP would be helpful."
"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."
"The price of the solution could improve."
"The pricing could be improved."
"The support from Micro Focus needs a lot of improvement."
"The documentation is limited."
"The solution should be cheaper."
"It would be great to support other languages and applications, and that is one of the things we can improve."
"Over the years, I haven't identified any specific enhancements that I desire; Visual Studio has consistently met my requirements seamlessly and flawlessly."
"The solution's deployment is not very easy and should be made easier."
"In Visual Studio we still don't have anything which can pinpoint memory leaks on a certain code line."
"Visual Studio Test Professional could improve by having better integration with external databases."
"There are too many features with the product and I would like there to be less."
More Visual Studio Test Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText UFT Developer is ranked 16th in Functional Testing Tools with 34 reviews while Visual Studio Test Professional is ranked 7th in Functional Testing Tools with 48 reviews. OpenText UFT Developer is rated 7.4, while Visual Studio Test Professional is rated 8.6. 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 Visual Studio Test Professional writes "Customization is a key feature as is the ability to integrate with third-party services ". OpenText UFT Developer is most compared with OpenText UFT One, Tricentis Tosca, OpenText Silk Test, Original Software TestDrive and Automai AppLoader, whereas Visual Studio Test Professional is most compared with TFS, Apache JMeter, Tricentis NeoLoad and SmartBear TestComplete. See our OpenText UFT Developer vs. Visual Studio Test Professional report.
See our list of best Functional 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.
