Micro Focus UFT Developer Review

Has a good recording feature but they could better integrate the API and the GUI testing


What is our primary use case?

Our primary use at this time is mainly to automate testing of Windows and web-based GUIs.

What is most valuable?

The recording feature is quite good as it helps us to find out how things are working. 

What needs improvement?

There is quite a bit of room for improvement. As time has gone on the product has failed to improve. Basically, Micro Focus' UFT (Unified Functional Testing) was a good product 15 years ago when it was first introduced. They have not really made substantial changes to it since then — which they should have done to make the product more useful and competitive. The gap between it and the competition has shown in the product's lack of development.

To improve the product they could better integrate the API and the GUI testing. At the moment, when you run the GUI testing, you run it in Visual Basic Script — which is a very old Microsoft product that Microsoft no longer supports. For the API testing, you have to write your tests in C# or C++. If you write a functional library for one test process, you can not use the same library with another test. A further problem is that even if you have a functional library written in VBScript, you can not use it for multiple projects. You have to make a copy of the library for each project that you use it with. Then, of course, every time you make a change, you have to replicate the change manually through the different projects and that is a real pain.

A new feature that I would like to see is better integration between the API and the GUI testing so that you could use the same libraries and the same scripting languages and so forth. That is a major missing piece because of their lack of effort in development over time.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using the product on and off for about 15 years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability of the product is adequate.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

When it comes to scalability we never had the opportunity to run UFT in parallel with multiple platforms, so I don't know that the product hits the mark at this point for the type of scalability we would want to test.

How are customer service and technical support?

We did actually contact the technical support for an issue once. The support was actually quite good. But, honestly, that is what I would expect for a product at this price point.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

Micro Focus UFT is an okay solution for specific purposes that we use it for. I also use Katalon Studio and, since Katalon Studios is Java and Groovy-based, it is much better and more up-to-date for testing.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was reasonably straightforward. I have no issues there. I don't remember exactly because it was a long time ago, but the setup was not excessively long. It was just like any basic software installation.

What about the implementation team?

We didn't need to use a reseller or a consultant for the implementation. We did it on our own.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

As far as comparing to other products, the licensing costs for UFT are very high. I don't remember the cost exactly. The maintenance of the service contract was very high as well and, frankly — compared with more modern tools — it was and is not worth it.

A good thing is that there are not any costs in addition to standard licensing fees, but the standard licensing fees are going to be high in comparison to other products so you don't gain anything.

What other advice do I have?

My advice for those considering this product as a solution is that they should look closely at alternative products to make a good comparison of features, capabilities, and cost. At the moment we are also using a product called Katalon Studio, which is freeware and it does pretty much everything that we want it to do.

The biggest lesson I've learned from using UFT is to compare solutions. I would go so far as to say that even if UFT were free, I would still prefer Katalon Studio.

On a scale from one to ten where ten is the best, I would rate UFT Pro as only a five now. I would rate it so low because over the last 10 or 15 years this product, which was a superior solution at one point, has not really been developed to its capacity.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Add a Comment
Guest