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."Integration with TDM, test data management tool, provides the ability to generate data or use identified (preset or parametrized) test data. It allows significant expansion of test coverage and flexibility, without creating new tests and needing to maintain them."
"It helped us to move from manual testing to automation testing."
"I like the way Broadcom ARD inserts test cases in execution mode. Also, ARD can be used apart from Broadcom TDM. It's an add-on through which you supply data through ARD test cases when there is a need for extra data."
"It gives us an idea of creating the visual diagrams, which are quite easy to use. It is helpful in creating our business processes."
"The most valuable features of Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer are ease of use, saving time for the team who builds test cases, and visibility of test cases."
"Defects can be traced in the solution."
"The support that we get from Broadcom is great."
"It takes away all the time to construct test cases, so it is all automatic now, but it also levels the playing field."
"The most valuable features of Eggplant Digital Automation Intelligence are bug hunting and OCR technology."
"It provides very strong cross-platform support."
"We did see a massive return on investment from using Eggplant."
"GUI testing is the strength of the tool. The tool works as expected, and the support response from eggPlant, as a company, has been quick and substantial."
"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."
"Everything is happening on the layout or display that is used by the user. Eggplant prompts processes, like 'click here,' or 'look for this image.' Eggplant makes it possible for QA people and BAs, working in the actual display, to check if the software is providing the right images, the right text, and the right results. They don't have to go inside the code or to the TCP/IP layer. Everything is happening at the highest level."
"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 features would be the image recognition and the OCR."
"Broadcom Agile Requirements Designer could improve the UI. Other solutions have a much better UI. The new UI should have a new modern framework."
"They do not have an engine to house test scripts to really pull together the testing pieces of it."
"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."
"It would help if it would save different subsets of test cases, use cases, etc., of a given diagram, for different purposes and provide an easy way to name those subsets."
"The solution could improve security and authentication."
"Data flexibility is something which I would like to see, along with more integration with App Test."
"A template in App Test should be created in advance. This has proven to be time consuming. The process is not fully automated, because there is a lot of manual intervention is required."
"Needs improvement in aligning models so they look clear and readable without having to move boxes around."
"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."
"There was no free trial in it."
"The solution would crash from time to time."
"We found that we had issues regarding the VPN setup, which is one of the reasons that we did not purchase this solution."
"A step forward would be to have event support, because it is more or less linear at the moment."
"Eggplant Digital Automation Intelligence could improve by lowering the price."
"The reporting function is a bit shallow. The solution does not offer very comprehensive reporting in terms of your test results. The reporting time and the logs are very high level as well. These areas need improvement."
"It has low productivity."
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.
