We performed a comparison between OpenText UFT One, Ranorex Studio, and Visual Studio Test Professional based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Perforce and others in Functional Testing Tools.
"The ease of record and playback as well as descriptive programming are the most valuable features of UFT (QTP)."
"We have used it for the web and Windows-based applications. It is very productive in terms of execution."
"Compared to other products, UFT One is better, faster, and more accurate."
"UFT has improved our ability to regression test."
"It is a stable solution."
"For traditional automation, approximately half of our tests end up automated. Therefore, we are saving half the testing time by pushing it off to automation. That gives it an intrinsic benefit of more time for manual testers and business testers to work on possibly more important and interesting things. For some of our applications, they don't just have to do happy path testing anymore, they can go more in-depth and breadth into the process."
"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."
"It's simple to set up."
"Object identification is good."
"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."
"Code Conversion is one of the great features because sometimes, the automation tool doesn't have the capability of maneuvering around two specific evaluations."
"I like the recording function and Ranorex Spy."
"The scalability is very good. It's probably one of the better tools I've seen on the market."
"The solution is fast and includes built-in libraries that record and playback."
"The solution is intuitive and pretty self-sustaining. You don't need a lot of help with it in terms of setup or assistance."
"Data security was prime for us. Being able to download and run tests on our local machines was a big plus. The flexibility Ranorex offers in terms of customization is outstanding."
"The most valuable feature has been to store all our packages in one place including SSIS packages, SQL tables, TFS and SSR."
"The solution is very useful for compiling existing projects and developing new projects."
"The most valuable features of Visual Studio Test Professional are the IntelliSense and the ease of adding the NuGet packages."
"The most valuable features are the SSIS reports, the deployment models, and the ability to interact with other Microsoft tools."
"The ability to quickly make your own components has been valuable."
"The whole suite is made for .NET development."
"What I like most about Visual Studio Test Professional is the way people publish templates and publish integration."
"The tool is flexible and easy to manage. We use it since it is scalable and easy to use. It integrates with solutions."
"Micro Focus UFT One could improve by having more maintenance. Every time when we run the solution and develop something, the next time when we run it it doesn't recognize the object. I have to redesign the object again and then run the solution. It's really a headache, it's not consistent."
"It could work with more browsers other than Internet Explorer, and could better handle new things like Ext JS."
"Object identification has room for improvement, to make it more efficient."
"Sometimes, the results' file size can be intense. I wish it was a little more compact."
"The product doesn't provide free training for the basic features."
"The UA objects are sometimes hard to recognize, so the coverage should be increased. Open-source alternatives have a broad scope. Also, it's sometimes difficult to make connections between two of the components in the UFT mobile center. It should be easier to set up the wireless solution because we have to set both. We directly integrate Selenium and APM, so we should try to cover all the features they have in APM and Selenium with the UFT mobile."
"It doesn't support Telerik UI controls and we are currently looking for a patch for this."
"The AI feature needs improvement. For banking applications, we input formatted text from documents, but the AI feature is recognizing three fields as one field, e.g., for a phone number, it puts all 10 digits in the international code or country code. Then, the script fails."
"Part of the challenge is that Ranorex's support is over in Europe, so we can't get responses on the same day. If we had support in the United States that was a bit more timely, that would be helpful."
"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."
"I would like to be able to customize the data grids. They are currently written in Visual Basic and we are unable to get down to the cell level without hard-code."
"One of the areas the service could be improved would be to have the training in Italian."
"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."
"When we have updated the solution in the past there have been issues with the libraries. They need to make it clear that the libraries need to be upgraded too."
"Ranorex is used in Windows while other solutions, for example, Katalon Studio, are cross-platform. (But in my opinion, overall, Ranorex is better)."
"Binding to other sources is very good but the object recognition in .NET desktop applications often doesn't work."
"There are too many features with the product and I would like there to be less."
"The solution is quite expensive."
"The performance could be faster."
"The vendor must release a lightweight version of the solution."
"We would like to be able to easily integrate this solution with our continuous integration tools, such as Jenkins."
"I would like to see more integration in the solution."
"The integration with Git needs improving because it is a bit disjointed and unpredictable."
"The documents on the Microsoft website are not very useful, and they ought to make it easier to find answers."
More Visual Studio Test Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
