We performed a comparison between OpenText UFT One and Xamarin Platform based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Perforce and others in Functional Testing Tools."The best feature of UFT by far is its compatibility with a large variety of products, tools and technologies. It is currently a challenge to find a single tool on the market besides UFT that will successfully automate tests for so many projects and environments."
"Hidden among the kitchen sink of features is a new Data Generation tool called the Test Combinations Generator."
"The most valuable feature for me is that it works on multiple platforms and technologies."
"Record and Replay to ease onboarding of new users."
"I find UFT One to be very good for thick clients, which are non-browser applications."
"I like the fact that we can use LeanFT with our UFT licenses as well."
"The shared repositories can be used throughout all testing which makes jobs easier."
"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."
"The combination of forms for cross-platform UI and C-Sharp for the programming language are my two favorite features."
"It usually saves time for application development. We write once and the code works everywhere."
"It is a true native solution, and we can use the cross-platform framework."
"Xamarin.Forms are very useful. Essentially, it's a framework that allows me to create the UI mostly in XAML. This XAML code is then translated into the native UI elements for each respective platform."
"Test Cloud, Calabash, SpecFlow, and Xamarin.UITest are the features which can’t be ignored because just writing code doesn’t mean your app will run flawlessly. You need to test your app on each possible device and configuration, which you can do easily."
"The platform is easy to learn as many tutorials are available on YouTube."
"The cross platform ability is a great asset."
"It brings about good code sharing strategies, which bring down cost and maintenance efforts."
"Sometimes it appears that UFT takes a while to open and sometimes will run slower than expected. Also, UFT uses a lot of memory. On this note, if you are running UFT on a virtual server I would add more RAM memory than the minimum requirements especially when using multiple add-ins. HP is pretty good about coming out with new patches to fix known issues and it pays for the user to check for new patches and updates on a regular basis."
"Object identification has room for improvement, to make it more efficient."
"I'd like to see UFT integrated more with some of the open source tools like Selenium, where web is involved."
"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."
"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."
"It should consume less CPU, and the licensing cost could be lower."
"The product should evolve to be flexible so one can use any programming language such as Java and C#, and not just VB script."
"They should include an automated feature to load backlog tests."
"The application platform could be improved."
"The file size is a bit big, so you have to make certain layers."
"The architecture in the Xamarin Platform has to improve, there are some features missing."
"The problem that I faced was that the communication, the roles, and the responsibilities, weren't defined between Microsoft and Xamarin."
"It needs offline sync capabilities to store data on devices persistently."
"It is common to find a problem that you would need to develop from the start since there are no third-party components to reuse."
"The solution always has room for improvement with price, integration, stability, and documentation."
"Xamarin Platform can improve by making the enterprise documentation better. There's a lot of basic documentation of how to do many of the functions of the solution, but there's not much enterprise-level documentation."
OpenText UFT One is ranked 2nd in Functional Testing Tools with 89 reviews while Xamarin Platform is ranked 4th in Mobile Development Platforms with 39 reviews. OpenText UFT One is rated 8.0, while Xamarin Platform 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 Xamarin Platform writes "It's about to be retired and replaced with an inferior product, but offers excellent cross-platform development capabilities". OpenText UFT One is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText UFT Developer, Katalon Studio, SmartBear TestComplete and UiPath Test Suite, whereas Xamarin Platform is most compared with Ionic, Appium, Apple Xcode, OutSystems and Mendix.
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.
