We performed a comparison between OpenText UFT One, Selenium HQ, and Zeenyx AscentialTest based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Perforce and others in Functional Testing Tools."The solution has good out-of-the-box protocols."
"I find UFT One to be very good for thick clients, which are non-browser applications."
"It's not only web-based but also for backend applications; you can also do the integration of the applications."
"It's easy to use for beginners and non-technical people."
"The initial setup is relatively easy."
"The high-level security, high standard and compatible SAP are great."
"I like the Help feature in UFT One. For example, if you are navigating a particular window, where there are different options. One wouldn’t know the purpose of every option, but there is no need to search because that window contains a Help button. If you click on that Help button, it directly navigates to the respective help needed. VBScript is very easy to understand and easy to prepare scripts with minimal learning curve."
"With certainty, the best feature of UFT is its compatibility with so many products, tools and technologies. It is a challenge currently to find a single tool on the market besides UFT that will successfully work for so many projects and environments. For example, UFT supports GUI testing of Oracle, PeopleSoft, PowerBuilder, SAP (v7.20), Siebel, Stingray, Terminal Emulator, Putty, and Windows Objects (particularly Dialog Boxes). Furthermore, UFT has the built-in functionality to import Excel input files."
"You can build your own framework. I think that's the most powerful feature. You can connect with a lot of other tools that use frameworks, or keywords, etc. That helps make it a stronger solution."
"It's easy for new people to get trained on this solution. If we are hiring new people, the resource pool in the market in test automation is largely around Selenium."
"The most valuable feature of Selenium HQ is the ability to create automatic tests that can replicate human behavior."
"It's available open-source and free. To install it, I just have to download it. It also doesn't require too many hardware resources compared to Micro Focus."
"The stability of the solution has been good, it is reliable we have not had any bugs."
"The primary benefit is its cost and the ability to use the cloud."
"Since Selenium HQ has multiple plug-ins, we can use it with multiple tools and multiple languages."
"It has helped to complete tests in less time, which would not be possible relying on manual testing only."
"It’s been really easy to automate the same application TestComplete struggled with. I have been able to automate two of our key applications in just a few months. I haven’t even taken their training."
"If you use the PowerBuilder application, do choose AscentialTest without thinking twice."
"AscentialTest's object recognition in snapshots is a robust feature that goes beyond standard elements, even accurately identifying objects within Datawindows."
"The most valuable feature of AscentialTest for us is that it fully supports PowerBuilder."
"You have to deal with issues such as the firewall and how can the tool talk with the application, i.e., if the application is on a company network and so on. That, of course, is important to figure out."
"Micro Focus UFT One could benefit from creating modules that are more accessible to non-technical users. Without a developer background or at least basic knowledge of VBScript, using Micro Focus UFT One may not be feasible for everyone. This is something that Micro Focus, now owned by OpenText, should consider in order to cater to business professionals as well. While Micro Focus UFT One does have a recording function, it still requires a certain level of IT proficiency to create effective automation, which may be challenging for those outside of the technical field."
"Jumping to functions is supported from any Action/BPT Component code, but not from inside a function library where the target function exists in another library file. Workaround: Select search entire project for the function."
"They should include an automated feature to load backlog tests."
"The scripting language could be improved. They're currently using Visual Basic, but I think that people need something more advanced, like Python or Java."
"They should include AI-based testing features."
"They need to reduce the cost because it is pretty high. It's approximately $3,000 per user."
"Object identification has room for improvement, to make it more efficient."
"Selenium HQ can be complex. The interface requires a QA engineer or an expert to use it."
"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."
"For email-based applications, we can't automate as we would like to, making it necessary to bring in a third-party product to do so."
"The solution is open-source, so everyone relies on the community to assist with troubleshooting and information sharing. If there's a complex issue no one has faced, it may take a while to solve the problem."
"We use X path for our selectors, and sometimes, it is difficult to create locators for elements. It is very time-consuming because they're embedded deeply. A lot of that comes from the way that you architect your page. If devs are putting the IDs on their elements, it is great, and it allows you to get those elements super fast, but that's not necessarily the case. So, Selenium should be able to get your elements a lot quicker. Currently, it is time-consuming to get your selectors, locate your locators, and get to the elements."
"It is not a licensed tool. The problem with that is that it won't be able to support Windows desktop applications. There is no support for Windows desktop applications. They can do something about it. Its user interface can also be improved, which is not great compared to the other latest tools. Anybody who has been working on functional testing or manual testing cannot directly work on Selenium HQ without learning programming skills, which is a disadvantage."
"Selenium HQ can improve by creating an enterprise version where it can provide the infrastructure for running the tests. Currently, we need to run the test in our infrastructure because it's a free tool. If Google can start an enterprise subscription and they can provide us with the infrastructure, such as Google Cloud infrastructure where we can configure it, and we can run the test there, it would be highly beneficial."
"There is no good tool to find the Xpath. They should provide a good tool to find Xpath for dynamic elements and integrate API (REST/ SOAP) testing support."
"Classes are not as object-oriented as I would like, but I am a programmer and not QA so I expect a lot."
"I would like to see an improvement in the User Interface."
"The only thing I can't wait for is for Zeenyx to add automating Mobile apps."
"Streamlining the retrieval of results from individual test set runs would be beneficial."
Earn 20 points
