Bitbar vs OpenText Business Processing Testing comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Bitbar and OpenText Business Processing Testing based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Perforce and others in Functional Testing Tools.
To learn more, read our detailed Functional Testing Tools Report (Updated: March 2024).
765,386 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"Ability to use different frameworks.""Game testing and the API for apps are good."

More Bitbar Pros →

"This solution is very helpful to me. I use it to execute my use cases without a manual interface.""The solution is quite stable with SAP. It's nice. I use it extensively."

More OpenText Business Processing Testing Pros →

Cons
"Lacking capability options that can be directly integrated.""Their pricing structure is complicated and can be improved."

More Bitbar Cons →

"There's only one thing that I think needs improvement. When I started off using this solution, I used the Google search engine to learn how to use the tool. I would also check with my colleagues who have a lot of knowledge about it. Selenium has fields of information available. If you click on that field there will be an explanation about how to use the tool. It will be very easier to understand it if Micro Focus included this feature. It is easy to find with the search button, but it would be a great help to the users who are new to this tool.""The solution shouldn't be so tightly integrated with the ALM tool that they have. It should have its own base rather than the repository."

More OpenText Business Processing Testing Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "The pricing is complicated. It's in the middle."
  • More Bitbar Pricing and Cost Advice →

    Information Not Available
    Ranking
    26th
    Views
    1,614
    Comparisons
    1,185
    Reviews
    0
    Average Words per Review
    0
    Rating
    N/A
    36th
    Views
    195
    Comparisons
    122
    Reviews
    0
    Average Words per Review
    0
    Rating
    N/A
    Buyer's Guide
    Functional Testing Tools
    March 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Perforce and others in Functional Testing Tools. Updated: March 2024.
    765,386 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Testdroid
    Micro Focus Business Process Testing, Business Process Testing, HPE Business Process Testing
    Learn More
    Overview
    Testdroid is a set of mobile software development and testing products by Bitbar Technologies Limited. Testdroid comprises three different products: Testdroid Cloud, Testdroid Recorder and Testdroid Enterprise. Testdroid provides an application programming interface through open source software available on GitHub. Testdroid can use testing frameworks, such as Robotium, Appium and uiautomator for native and Selenium for web applications, targeted for mobile application and game developers. Testdroid Cloud contains real Android and iOS powered devices, some of which are available for users. Testdroid Cloud lets users run tests simultaneously on cloud-based service. Testdroid Recorder is a tool for developers and testers for recording user-actions and producing JUnit based test cases on mobile application and games. Testdroid Recorder is available at the Eclipse marketplace. Testdroid Enterprise is a server software for managing automated testing on multiple real Android and iOS powered devices, supporting Gradle build system and Jenkins Continuous Integration.

    OpenText Business Processing Testing (BPT) test framework software will help you move from one-off manual testing and ad hoc functional automated testing to an architected approach with a library of reusable test components. BPT accelerates the move to component-based testing with an integrated test framework approach to creating a repository of reusable test modules that allow for changes to be made once, then propagated across your distributed agile teams to all affected tests.

    Sample Customers
    Rovio, Paf, Supercell, NITRO Games, Seriously, AVG, Google, Bosch, Yahoo, Microsoft, Yandex, Mozilla, eBay, PayPal, TESCO, Cisco WebEx, Facebook, LinkedIn, skype, Subway
    Migros Bank AG
    Top Industries
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company18%
    Government10%
    Financial Services Firm9%
    Healthcare Company8%
    No Data Available
    Company Size
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business25%
    Midsize Enterprise14%
    Large Enterprise62%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business14%
    Midsize Enterprise14%
    Large Enterprise71%
    Buyer's Guide
    Functional Testing Tools
    March 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Perforce and others in Functional Testing Tools. Updated: March 2024.
    765,386 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    Bitbar is ranked 26th in Functional Testing Tools while OpenText Business Processing Testing is ranked 36th in Functional Testing Tools. Bitbar is rated 7.0, while OpenText Business Processing Testing is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Bitbar writes "It's helped me when I've been short of devices and want to test whether the application will work on a specific device or not". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText Business Processing Testing writes "Excellent usability, but the solution shouldn't be so tightly integrated with their ALM tool". Bitbar is most compared with BrowserStack, SmartBear TestComplete, CrossBrowserTesting, Sauce Labs and LambdaTest, whereas OpenText Business Processing Testing is most compared with .

    See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors.

    We monitor all Functional Testing Tools 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.