We performed a comparison between IBM DevOps Test UI and Ranorex Studio 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."It is compatible with all sorts of Dark Net applications. Its coverage is very good."
"Test automation is most valuable because it saves a lot of time."
"The most valuable feature is the UI component tester."
"IBM Rational Functional Tester is very contextual."
"Easy integration with CI Tools like Jenkins, TFS, and TeamCity."
"The most valuable feature of Ranorex Studio is the capture and replay tool. You don't need to do script testing. When you launch any application from Ranorex Studio it automatically captures these test case steps. The next time you can replay the tool the flow automatically happens again. For example, when you do the logging and all the activity will be captured by the tool, and re-execute the same step by using automatization."
"The solution is stable."
"The solution is intuitive and pretty self-sustaining. You don't need a lot of help with it in terms of setup or assistance."
"The scalability is very good. It's probably one of the better tools I've seen on the market."
"This is a powerful, reliable and versatile all-around application testing suite."
"The solutions's regression testing is very important for our company, as is the continuous integration process."
"The solution is fast and includes built-in libraries that record and playback."
"They need to do a complete revamp so that even a non-technical person can manage the tool."
"If the solution is running on Linux, there are some issues around application compatibility."
"The latest version has increased load time before testing can be run."
"As many of our products are moving from PC to mobile, the most important thing that this solution needs is mobile app support."
"I'd like to know their testing strategies and to know what they can automate and what they can't. It can become pretty frustrating if you're trying to automate something that changes on a monthly or weekly basis."
"One of the areas the service could be improved would be to have the training in Italian."
"There were a lot of issues we faced. One notable improvement would be better API integration within the tool itself, as we still rely on external tools like Postman."
"Ranorex is used in Windows while other solutions, for example, Katalon Studio, are cross-platform. (But in my opinion, overall, Ranorex is better)."
"The automation of the SAP application could perhaps be improved to make it much simpler."
"The solution does not support dual or regression testing."
"For our purposes it requires integration with other products to get out the results in the format we want them. Adding this to the product could improve it."
"When Ranorex is upgraded, the compatibility with other projects, in version control, in-house or on-premise, fails on occasion. However, overall, the stability is good."
IBM DevOps Test UI is ranked 22nd in Functional Testing Tools with 8 reviews while Ranorex Studio is ranked 12th in Functional Testing Tools with 46 reviews. IBM DevOps Test UI is rated 7.2, while Ranorex Studio is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of IBM DevOps Test UI writes "Reliable test automation, and test data creation with efficient support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Ranorex Studio writes "Good data security, allowing local installations to prevent data from going to the internet". IBM DevOps Test UI is most compared with Katalon Studio, Tricentis Tosca, Selenium HQ and HCL OneTest, whereas Ranorex Studio is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, SmartBear TestComplete, froglogic Squish and Oracle Application Testing Suite. See our IBM DevOps Test UI vs. Ranorex Studio report.
See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors, best Regression Testing 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.
