We performed a comparison between Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer and Eggplant Test based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Test Management Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Helps the communication between the testing organization and the requirements group. It helps us to simplify the work. Instead of dealing with individual test cases, you're working with a model."
"The scale possibilities are endless, especially when combined with all the other products that CA has to offer."
"The support that we get from Broadcom is great."
"The optimization technique helps in giving us the minimum number of test cases with maximum coverage."
"It helped us to move from manual testing to automation testing."
"The modeling is a game-changer."
"The ability to create models/diagrams at multiple levels (nest/embed them) helps in taking models from high-level business requirements and building them into detailed requirements models and test models. Plus, it helps reuse lower level models. It also allows maintaining models at appropriate levels, even for very complex systems/solutions."
"CA ARD has some beautiful features which I haven't found anywhere else. For example, when designing or creating our test cases and doing scenarios, we are able to restrict our flows. If we take a data link between two processes, we can actually restrict it, so that, in production, if our functionality breaks down, we can restrict that and all the flows related to it will be removed from the test data set."
"It is easy to set up."
"DAI's newest release allows us to test via scripts rather than models, because we have done 95 percent of our development in functional, not through modeling. I am really happy that then we can use the controller to run scripts rather than having to translate things to models. There are lots of options."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to create code from a flow chart, and then run the code through it."
"The most valuable features of Eggplant Digital Automation Intelligence are bug hunting and OCR technology."
"Its scalability is good. It is useful for desktop applications, and it also uses OCR and does image recognition."
"The main feature of Eggplant Test is that it can do fully automated web testing and app testing."
"The features that we like the most are the developer interface and the ability to quickly develop and deploy tests."
"The solution is based on a Windows model, where adding users is just a few clicks. It is easy to manage users and add them."
"They do not have an engine to house test scripts to really pull together the testing pieces of it."
"I think it's already coming, but it needs more automation aspects. There is a tab for Automation, but I think it's not robust. I think that it's going to be a crucial element of the tool."
"Needs improvement in aligning models so they look clear and readable without having to move boxes around."
"The solution could be more user-friendly. For example, attachments could be icon-based to make it easier for the user to notice them."
"At present, there is no option for test data parameters from ARD for virtual databases. We have to create them in TDM and push them as well. Virtual database connectivity needs to be improved. They need to come up with some areas where they can create synthetic data parameters easily from the test cases that have been designed."
"Data flexibility is something which I would like to see, along with more integration with App Test."
"The solution could improve security and authentication."
"Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer could improve the UI. Other solutions have a much better UI. The new UI should have a new modern framework."
"I would like to see standardized actions already built into Eggplant. For example, "wait eight seconds". That way, I wouldn't need to create it as an action. Right now, I have to program that wait and describe it as an action so that everybody knows it is an action that waits eight seconds... That way, somebody who is not familiar with programming processes like "if-else", or "for", or "while", would be able, from the first moment, and without programming, to put some easy-to-use, standardized, actions in place."
"The solution would crash from time to time."
"A step forward would be to have event support, because it is more or less linear at the moment."
"We found that we had issues regarding the VPN setup, which is one of the reasons that we did not purchase this solution."
"There was no free trial in it."
"The language is too specific; it is just for Eggplant."
"If one area could be improved, it would be some of their documentation. In particular, some of their online help and user support documentation is a little bit out of date and could be revised and updated on a more frequent basis. Other than that, I haven't really found any issues or problems."
"Its performance and stability could be better."
More Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer Pricing and Cost Advice →
Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer is ranked 10th in Test Management Tools with 20 reviews while Eggplant Test is ranked 8th in Test Management Tools with 16 reviews. Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer is rated 8.0, while Eggplant Test is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer writes "Easy to use, beneficial test case visibility, and effective support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Eggplant Test writes "Empowers effective test automation with comprehensive platform coverage and scalability". Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Jira, TFS and Sealights, whereas Eggplant Test is most compared with Selenium HQ, Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, SmartBear TestComplete and froglogic Squish. See our Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer vs. Eggplant Test report.
See our list of best Test Management Tools vendors.
We monitor all Test Management 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.
