We performed a comparison between IBM DevOps Test UI and Worksoft Certify 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."IBM Rational Functional Tester is very contextual."
"Test automation is most valuable because it saves a lot of time."
"The most valuable feature is the UI component tester."
"It is compatible with all sorts of Dark Net applications. Its coverage is very good."
"The biggest feature is the fact that it's codeless. It takes away the problem of finding people with the correct programming language, since there are multiple such languages. It saves time in introducing people to the solution because they don't need programming knowledge, they just need to be able to think logically. This makes it vastly usable by more people who are not even acquainted with IT at all."
"The ease of use is superior to anything on the market. It's very easy to integrate. We've been very impressed with the tool. Because we primarily use the configuration with SAP, the integration is pretty seamless. But we have used our own in-house VB app as well, and it's worked very well with that."
"It is a huge improvement, as it recognizes complex general applications, where most tools won't recognize the objects within them."
"The most valuable feature is its time saving. Once development is complete, the short time that it takes to execute a test is invaluable. It saves a number of dollars and man-hours."
"We prefer Worksoft over other platforms because it's a low-code solution"
"With Worksoft, we have been able to automate six of our smoke tests in four months."
"It's pretty seamless with SAP and Salesforce because they've built in the field definitions and all the things that you need. You literally turn it on and execute your script and it records it. It's very simple. Then you can go back and put in some of the other functions. For example, instead of hard-coding field selections, you put in a data table so you can run it multiple times or with multiple data. It was actually written to work very well with SAP."
"The most valuable features of Worksoft Certify are the way we can maintain the processes and sub-processes inside. We can immediately identify and replicate multiple objects in the application without having a major issue with it. We are able to do a lot of operations even with the solution being completely scriptless. That is a large advantage compared with other automation tools."
"As many of our products are moving from PC to mobile, the most important thing that this solution needs is mobile app support."
"The latest version has increased load time before testing can be run."
"If the solution is running on Linux, there are some issues around application compatibility."
"They need to do a complete revamp so that even a non-technical person can manage the tool."
"An area that I would like to see improved is how the permissions are applied. If you're applying permissions groups to a user, one of the options is to delete the group entirely and lose the entire permission group, rather than just deleting the permission from the user, which seems a little silly. In my opinion, that whole module of permissions is very confusing and lends itself to common errors."
"We're really hopeful for the mobile testing in Worksoft Certify going forward."
"Worksoft Certify's tech support's response time could be improved."
"One feature that we have been asking for has been to treat tests as code and store the source code for tests in a configuration management tool. Right now, for version control of testing, it's all internally within the tool. If we have a test of a business process and want to revive that test, our methodology now is purely manual work. We go into the tool, create a copy of the existing test, and call the next one: v2. Now, we have two of them and the only way you can tell them apart is by its naming convention."
"We ran into some issues with the version that we were on during the initial setup. We ran into a bug on one version, then they upgraded us to a new version, and we got hit with another bug. So, they had to put us in a beta. That was a little frustrating. However, besides the bugs that we ran into, the install was pretty straightforward."
"The technical support of the product is an area of concern where certain improvements are required."
"For Execution Manager, I would like it to be more robust interface and be able to view the remote machines full screen instead of a little window."
"The technical support comes on, and says, "Oh, so-and-so link is here, go through that link, and make the modifications." I'm not comfortable in making those changes. I want to schedule a call, share my screen, and have them fix it for me."
IBM DevOps Test UI is ranked 22nd in Functional Testing Tools with 8 reviews while Worksoft Certify is ranked 9th in Functional Testing Tools with 64 reviews. IBM DevOps Test UI is rated 7.2, while Worksoft Certify is rated 8.4. 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 Worksoft Certify writes "Enables us to automate end-to-end testing of our integration between S/4HANA and Salesforce.com". IBM DevOps Test UI is most compared with Katalon Studio, Tricentis Tosca, Selenium HQ, HCL OneTest and OpenText UFT One, whereas Worksoft Certify is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Selenium HQ, OpenText UFT One, Katalon Studio and Apache JMeter. See our IBM DevOps Test UI vs. Worksoft Certify report.
See our list of best Functional 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.
