We performed a comparison between BrowserStack and OpenText UFT One based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Functional Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Local testing for products with no public exposure is an advantage in development."
"It just added some flexibility. There was nothing that improved our coding standards, etc. because all of our UIs were functional before we tried it."
"It is a scalable solution."
"The most valuable feature is that it provides parallel and cross-browser testing. It enables us to run tests on multiple browsers or devices simultaneously."
"The product's initial setup phase was not very difficult."
"I have found that BrowserStack is stable."
"Testing across devices and browsers without maintaining that inventory is invaluable."
"I've worked on testing integrations with BrowserStack, particularly with a platform called IT. This involves testing the registration process, including receiving verification codes on devices and phones. BrowserStack has been excellent for testing these integrations, providing a seamless workflow development experience."
"I like the fact that we can use LeanFT with our UFT licenses as well."
"The interface is fine and there is nothing else to add in terms of enhancement."
"It offers a wide range of testing."
"The best feature of UFT by far is its compatibility with a large variety of products, tools and technologies. It is currently a challenge to find a single tool on the market besides UFT that will successfully automate tests for so many projects and environments."
"Object Repository Technology, which is a good mean to identify graphical components of the applications under test."
"I find UFT One to be very good for thick clients, which are non-browser applications."
"The most valuable feature of Micro Focus UFT One is you are able to use it with many other technologies. I have not had an instance where the solution was not able to automate or execute automation. I was able to use COBOL to manage some automation."
"This product is easy to use, understand, and maintain."
"One of the biggest issues with BrowserStack is that if you don't have your network set up by the book, it's hard to get it to work with local desk machines."
"I haven't seen AI in BrowserStack, making it in an area where improvements are required in the product."
"There is room for improvement in pricing."
"We are struggling to do local testing."
"BrowserStack is scalable, but cost is significant for those living in Mexico."
"We had some execution issues."
"I would like for there to be more integration with BrowserStack and other platforms."
"Sometimes BrowserStack is really slow and devices are not loading. it is really annoying and that's why we bought several newer devices because sometimes it's affecting us a lot."
"I'd like to see test case-related reports included in the solution."
"The UA objects are sometimes hard to recognize, so the coverage should be increased. Open-source alternatives have a broad scope. Also, it's sometimes difficult to make connections between two of the components in the UFT mobile center. It should be easier to set up the wireless solution because we have to set both. We directly integrate Selenium and APM, so we should try to cover all the features they have in APM and Selenium with the UFT mobile."
"It doesn't support Telerik UI controls and we are currently looking for a patch for this."
"I'd like to see UFT integrated more with some of the open source tools like Selenium, where web is involved."
"Sometimes UFT can take a while to open and sometimes will run slower than expected."
"The solution is expensive."
"We have had some issues with stability, where it crashes sometimes."
"They should include an automated feature to load backlog tests."
BrowserStack is ranked 5th in Functional Testing Tools with 25 reviews while OpenText UFT One is ranked 2nd in Functional Testing Tools with 89 reviews. BrowserStack is rated 8.0, while OpenText UFT One is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of BrowserStack writes "Good in the area of automation and offers a high test coverage to users". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText UFT One writes "With regularly occurring releases, a QA team member can schedule tests, let the tests run unattended, and then examine the results". BrowserStack is most compared with LambdaTest, Sauce Labs, Perfecto, CrossBrowserTesting and Eggplant Test, whereas OpenText UFT One is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText UFT Developer, Katalon Studio, SmartBear TestComplete and UiPath Test Suite. See our BrowserStack vs. OpenText UFT One report.
See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors and best Regression 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.
