We performed a comparison between Appium and OpenText LoadRunner Professional based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about OutSystems, Mendix, Salesforce and others in Mobile Development Platforms."It runs completely flawlessly and seamlessly every day."
"We develop apps using the React Native framework, and Appium integrates well for testing those apps. The Appium automation framework also has good integration with GitHub Actions and plenty of other tools and frameworks, including BrowserStack."
"The way Appium server interacts with mobile apps is fantastic. It provides all the information about the elements inside the app, Android as well as iOS. I can interact with the element quickly, just type some text or get some text values from the element - whether it's a drop-down, or web text, or a native element."
"Obviously because of automation, it reduces manual testing efforts."
"We get a list that shows all devices that are connected to the system."
"Appium provides a record-and-play option, and the commands are the same as those that Selenium uses. So a person who has some exposure to Selenium will be able to write a piece of code in Appium."
"The library is extensive so the driver interacts with most functions or actions on mobile devices."
"The automation part is extremely helpful in streamlining our processes."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to create performance test cases quickly and then execute them. It provides a lot of powerful features to do that very efficiently and effectively."
"I like LoadRunner's ability to use multiple protocols. That's one of the greatest features along with the ability to test service calls between the app and server."
"Very useful for finding out how the system responds to load, stress, and normal situations, as well as benchmarking with other industry competitors. It also improved our response time, memory delegation, and CPU delegation. In addition, we used LoadRunner to optimize our database and website."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten...Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten."
"I am impressed with the tool's correlation function."
"There are various languages that they allow those programs to be written in, whether you want to use Java or something else."
"The tool's most valuable features are scripting and automation."
"The solution is quite stable."
"Appium can improve when the case fails, there should be a feature where you can generate the report from Appium. Once you're on a test case, automatically the screenshot should be captured which would avoid manual intervention. These features would be beneficial to migrate to Appium."
"There is always a concern about the amount of code that is required to enhance the automation process. The idea of having less code or no code is what we would like to see in future updates."
"It needs to accommodate applications that use React.js and AngularJS."
"Image recognition could be improved. We have some images in our mobile applications. It should be able to run from the cloud, so we can automate the catcher."
"If it had more facility for configuration it would be a spectacular solution."
"Support-wise, it could be better."
"One thing which can be really helpful is that there is some kind of a recorder made available rather than scripting everything."
"We haven't been able to fully leverage Appium for multiple reasons. I think number one is just that the tests take a long time to run. We have had some issues around just the results themselves and how predictable they are, but those are not issues with Appium directly."
"The product is not stable and reliable in the version we are currently using."
"The tool should consider releasing a SaaS version since it makes more sense nowadays."
"In terms of resource management, you need a lot of high capacity boxes if you need to generate a load of 1,000 or 2,000 users."
"The price of this solution should be cheaper."
"Sometimes we are not be able to click on some of the buttons due to the screen mismatching and compatibility issues."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is low, and ten is high-quality technical support, I rate the support a one."
"The only scenario we see a complexity is when we have single-page applications where JavaScript is talking to the server and coming back. That's the only scenario where we find some difficulties."
"The pricing model, selling model, and business model need to be adjusted. For non-enterprise organizations, Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional is too expensive and not worth the cost."
More OpenText LoadRunner Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
Appium is ranked 7th in Mobile Development Platforms with 25 reviews while OpenText LoadRunner Professional is ranked 2nd in Performance Testing Tools with 77 reviews. Appium is rated 8.0, while OpenText LoadRunner Professional is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Appium writes "It's easy to launch applications". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText LoadRunner Professional writes "A sophisticated tool that supports many languages and works with all kinds of applications". Appium is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, Perfecto, Xamarin Platform and Apache JMeter, whereas OpenText LoadRunner Professional is most compared with Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, Apache JMeter and IBM Rational Performance Tester.
We monitor all Mobile Development Platforms 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.
