What is most valuable?
The solution is in the top list for automatic functional testing. It enables you to test a lot of infrastructure, a lot of applications: web, not web, with the different protocols, and so on.
HP UFT can do GUI testing (Graphical User Interface testing) and also can test directly web services using different protocols.
In the first case, the tool interact directly with the graphical interface, recognizing the objects inside (buttons, links, titles, etc.) and interacting with them (clicking, compiling forms, etc.); so the test is done like a human tester do, but automatically.
In the second case, the tool use the web services of the back-end of the application under test, that can be of different protocols (SOAP, REST, database queries, etc.).
At this moment, we are using version 12. Version 14 will be released soon.
It is very flexible. There are a lot of features. We can do a lot of things with it.
How has it helped my organization?
We use it to automate our integration testing. This lowers our total cost because tests are done automatically rather than manually by people. This saves time. With automatic tests, we can run different types of tests simultaneously. This is the most valuable thing.
What needs improvement?
There a lot of things that can be improved:
- Support for other environments and other infrastructures.
- I hoped that it would also be useful for the internet of things and big data. At this moment, it is not useful at all for big data. I don’t really know for the internet of things, but I think that it's not very substantial; but I hope that it will be in the future.
- For automatic functional testing, it works fine and covers a lot of statistics, but there is always something that doesn't work. It could be little or not.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
I have been using this product for six years. When it totally changes in a new version, the stability is not very good. For example, when we changed from version 11 to 12, from my point of view it was a mess. It was totally not ready to go into production in companies. Now it very much seems to work for some things. It is not stable, of course; but remember that we are working on different environments. It could be that something doesn't work.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
The scalability is good. They add a lot of features with every new release. I just learned about the two things that are being added now that are valuable for my organization.
How is customer service and technical support?
It works fine at this moment. We had some problems before with the product. They understood that we were in trouble, and now they are giving us support. Normally, if a company is not having any particular problems, technical support is a little bit slow; but, in the end, if you wait, they either solve the problem or promise to fix it in the next version.
How was the initial setup?
I did this kind of work for some years, so when I did the setup in the organization where I am now, I knew how to set up the product. It was a little bit simple. From that point of view, it is a normal installation; so it's okay.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
It wasn’t involved in the decision to buy this product, but I would say the top vendors: IBM, CA, or Oracle.
I saw some products that are very simple. Ease of use is one of the best things and most important about HPE products.
Other products, for example, are less easy to use, but they work fine.
HP products sometimes have a lot of bugs to fix. You get in trouble sometimes because you want to adhere to some timelines, but then you find that the solution doesn't work. This is a mess for you. The issues of reliability and licensing are also very important, of course, when choosing a vendor.
What other advice do I have?
If you want something that covers a lot of testing topologies, use UFT because it has a lot of features. If you are looking for something simpler, and don’t need a lot of automatic functional testing topologies, then maybe I could suggest something else.
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Dec 26 2016