We performed a comparison between IBM Rational Test Workbench, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, and Selenium HQ based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, OpenText, Tricentis and others in Performance Testing Tools."Reporting is pretty good. Its interface is also good. I'm overall pretty happy with the functionality and use of IBM Rational Test Workbench."
"This solution provides for API testing, functional UI testing, performance testing, and service virtualization."
"The TCO has been optimized along with the total ROI."
"The solution can scale."
"The TruClient feature is the most valuable for us. An application with testing can only be scripted using TruClient, so it's part web-based, but it also has its own protocol combined with HTTP and HTML. So many other tools do not recognize this specific proprietary protocol. Using TruClient, we can still create scripts that cover everything that we need to cover."
"The fact that the solution supports multiple protocols such as open source, VuGen, TruWeb, TruClient, and SAP is very important because these protocols help us to concentrate on what is really needed to produce performance tests. If something is not supported, you have to use other tools or find other ways of assimilating loads."
"OpenText LoadRunner Cloud eliminates the need for our own testing infrastructure when running tests."
"The reports are very relevant to the customers’ expectations."
"The most valuable feature is having load generators in countries where we don’t have access to them."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to configure browser settings for different operating systems and on different versions without the need to install every single version on each machine and to manage them."
"It has helped to complete tests in less time, which would not be possible relying on manual testing only."
"In general, I would say that the API set is the most valuable feature."
"Selenium web driver - Java."
"The most valuable features are ExpectedConditions, actions, assertions, verifications, flexible rates, and third-party integrations."
"The most valuable feature of Selenium HQ is it provides support for third-party tools, such as screenshots, and automates Windows-based applications."
"What I like the most about this product is that it gives us a lot of freedom to code anything, there is no restriction on the type of function you can do."
"The most valuable feature of Selenium is how easy it is to automate."
"Selenium is the fastest tool compared to other competitors. It can run on any language, like Java, Python, C++, and .NET. So we can test any application on Selenium, whether it's mobile or desktop."
"It should have more interfaces. In terms of interfaces or protocols, what you can do with Rational is far limited as compared to other products out there. What it does, it does great, but it only gives you limited types of protocols. It supports between 8 to 15 types of protocols, whereas other test tools give you 20 to 30 types of protocols with which you can do testing and convert to script. It records Javascript-based scripts, and you got to know a little bit of Java to basically be able to edit them, but the level of editing you got to do is very low. I like that, but the ability to edit the script is not as good as Parasoft or LoadRunner, which have C-Script."
"There are a number of things that they can do to simplify the tools, but the most important thing that they need to do is simplify the installation."
"It doesn't provide custom reports. You can only use the default reports which contain irrelevant data or is missing data that we need."
"Scriptless automation is an area that can be improved."
"An area for improvement is analytics on why response times are slow from certain countries."
"Their documentation is not technical enough for us. We would like to have much deeper technical documentation so that we can self-serve without constantly having to go back to them and ask."
"Reporting and analysis need improvement. Compared to the old school LoadRunner Windows application, the reporting and analysis are mediocre in LoadRunner Cloud."
"I'd like to see more ability to dive more deeply into the configuration."
"We did have some challenges with the initial implementation."
"Its scripting features need improvement."
"I don't have that much experience with it, but I know that Selenium is more used for websites. It is not for testing desktop applications, which is a downside of it. It can support desktop applications more."
"The installation could be simplified, it is a bit difficult to install."
"Selenium HQ can improve the authorization login using OTP, it is not able to be done in this solution."
"The stop control needs to be improved with a configuration tool to enable desktop support."
"I continuously see failures in threads when it is running in parallel."
"I have found that at times the tool does not catch the class features of website content correctly. The product's AWS configuration is also hard."
"It would be awesome if there was a standalone implementation of Selenium for non-developer users."
"Sometimes we face challenges with Selenium HQ. There are third party tools that we use, for example for reading the images, that are not easy to plug in. The third party add-ons are difficult to get good configuration and do not have good support. I would like to see better integration with other products."
Earn 20 points
