We performed a comparison between Appium and IBM Rational Test Workbench based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about OutSystems, Mendix, Salesforce and others in Mobile Development Platforms."The way Appium server interacts with mobile apps is fantastic. It provides all the information about the elements inside the app, Android as well as iOS. I can interact with the element quickly, just type some text or get some text values from the element - whether it's a drop-down, or web text, or a native element."
"It's an open-source solution with a very large community and available documentation."
"The solution is stable."
"We get a list that shows all devices that are connected to the system."
"The latest versions of the solution are stable."
"It runs completely flawlessly and seamlessly every day."
"Appium's best feature is that it supports multiple frameworks."
"The most valuable feature is that it's easy to launch applications. Appium has everything that Selenium has. So many good tools support Appium. We can take some Excel sheets and use them to fill out the text box that's in there. We can also take screenshots of failures."
"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."
"They should add an in-built framework."
"The tool needs to add a dependency manager."
"There is always a concern about the amount of code that is required to enhance the automation process. The idea of having less code or no code is what we would like to see in future updates."
"An application developed on the Unity platform, such as a gaming application, objects are moving in that case. Interacting with those elements is still lacking in Appium. Appium doesn't have the internal library to play with the Unity platform. That is a huge lack right now."
"It needs to accommodate applications that use React.js and AngularJS."
"Appium has problems with automated validations following iOS updates, causing us to have to validate manually."
"The user interface needs improvement because there are issues when setting up environment variables."
"If it had more facility for configuration it would be a spectacular solution."
"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 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."
Earn 20 points
Appium is ranked 7th in Mobile Development Platforms with 25 reviews while IBM Rational Test Workbench is ranked 18th in Performance Testing Tools. Appium is rated 8.0, while IBM Rational Test Workbench is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Appium writes "It's easy to launch applications". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Rational Test Workbench writes "Good reporting and interface, but supports limited types of protocols and requires low-level script editing". Appium is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, Perfecto, Xamarin Platform and SmartBear TestComplete, whereas IBM Rational Test Workbench is most compared with HCL OneTest and Postman.
We monitor all Mobile Development Platforms reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.