We performed a comparison between Broadcom Service Virtualization and OpenText Service Virtualization based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Broadcom, OpenText, SmartBear and others in Service Virtualization.
"The most valuable features are the recording and creating of virtual services."
"CA Service Virtualization has helped us advance the development cycle when third-party interfaces are not available to us."
"We have had developers produce code later than we wanted to, but we've had some other stuff that was dependent on that. So what we were able to do was virtualize these assets and then go forward with our developer and not have to wait for these additional services to be available."
"I think the pricing is quite fair because this solution provides a lot of functionalities, and is quite stable."
"Unit testing or early life testing did not have to be stopped or delayed because those services were not available."
"The most valuable feature is that it supports so many protocols. We, being a large bank, have almost all the protocols, and it supports all of them, so that's one good thing."
"The most valuable features include the capability to use other program languages such as PLSQR, JAVA, .NET."
"In the case of the virtualization of TCP/IP protocols for third-party terminal insurance, there was a device terminal, which was interacting with the application via the TCP/IP protocol. Most of the tools don't support that, but we were able to achieve it using Broadcom Service Virtualization."
"The support for integration patterns and the ease of use to wizard-based utility is what I would consider the most important features for service virtualization platforms."
"The feature which is most valuable in this solution is the ease of use. The product is very easy to use and very easy to implement."
"It is easy to use. This is what I tell my customers. The coding is easier to develop as well."
"The most valuable feature is that it reduces the dependency so that the down time of the environment is not a major cost. That cost can be used for something else like the cloud."
"The most valuable feature is SAP virtualization."
"One major feature I would like to see is on the user administration part. Right now, anybody can access any of the folders and any of the projects."
"I'd like to see more of the newer technologies included in there, looking mainly from a mobile perspective, possibly, so you can virtualize some of the aspects that we're going to be doing for mobile testing."
"I really want to see more of the "express" kind of model, where you get a little bit for free. I'd love to be able to see you be able to edit and author tests without having to be connected to a licensed server. And then, if you want to go and execute tests, then you go and connect to the server... I think it would unblock people to be able to do a lot more work from home or from remote places, where they can't really connect to the server."
"The cost is an area that needs improvement. There are a couple of other tools which provide support for performance testing with the base version itself, but Broadcom needs a separate component to support virtualization for performance testing. This is a costly component."
"I would like to have more flexibility towards the mainframe virtualization and also in JDBC virtualization."
"We had to implement an external service catalog. We put it in ServiceNow. I would like to see an integrated service catalog."
"DevTest is pretty massive. It's hard to tell what different parts of it can be used to do different things. They should modulize it more."
"I would rate the tech support a nine out of ten. They need more knowledge about the connectivity to DevOps orchestration."
"HPE products are good, but they never make a product for a specific use. They make a product for the enterprise because that is their vision. They like multi-generational business plans. That means that they don't deliver small bits and pieces, but rather, they deliver to the enterprise."
"The current protocol needs to be updated to be much more flexible. The product needs more technical flexibility in implementation and customization."
"The integration with other solutions, such as ALM and Jira, should be improved."
"The monitoring feature is not impressive because they use Windows for so much monitoring. They set a lock on the window, and then we have to gather the information from the main monitoring feature in the Windows server. There is not enough capacity for problem solving performance issues."
"More support for different protocols. I would love to see more wizards rather than relying on some custom coding, which you can use C# as well as Visual Basic scripting. In the service virtualization platform, I would love to see more wizard features as well as the ability to connect to an external database, which by the way, we have put an enhancement request in for. I'd love to see that in the service virtualization platform."
More Broadcom Service Virtualization Pricing and Cost Advice →
More OpenText Service Virtualization Pricing and Cost Advice →
Broadcom Service Virtualization is ranked 1st in Service Virtualization with 97 reviews while OpenText Service Virtualization is ranked 2nd in Service Virtualization with 22 reviews. Broadcom Service Virtualization is rated 8.2, while OpenText Service Virtualization is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Broadcom Service Virtualization writes "Feature-rich, easy to configure and set up, and the support is good". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText Service Virtualization writes "Is scalable and easy to use, but the monitoring feature needs improvement". Broadcom Service Virtualization is most compared with ReadyAPI Test, Parasoft Virtualize, IBM Rational Test Virtualization Server and Tricentis Tosca, whereas OpenText Service Virtualization is most compared with Parasoft Virtualize and ReadyAPI Virtualization.
See our list of best Service Virtualization vendors.
We monitor all Service Virtualization 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.
Yes, HP's product in this domain is called, HP Service Virtualization
Hello,
Also, I’d like to add that “HP Service test” mentioned below is a tool for functional integration (API) testing, but not for Service Virtualization. Please, pay attention to it.
Thank you.
Ok so let me ask you guys Does HP has the capability of virtualization ? Do they they virtualization like other product ( lisa, parasoft, green hat etc ).
HP Service Test and CA Lisa are not comparable products.
HP Service Test is comparable to Soap UI- create scripts/tests that drive data to a web service.
HP Service Test is one of three products in the HP Unified Functional Testing Suite: what used to be Quick Test Professional, Service Test and Service Test Manager.
Hello,
Unfortunately, I don’t have experience in CA Lisa SV.
However, I have evaluated HP SV and have an opinion about it – I can share my thoughts if you need, but I don’t think that it will help you to answer the question.
“What needs to be considered when comparing them?”
Of course a lot is depends on your necessities, but for the most of cases it doesn’t matter what tools you are going to compare – I believe that all the needs are the same because of the domain area (SV in this case).
- Number of Protocols supported
- Record and Reproduce possibility
- Create virtual services from scratch
- Easiness of installing, configuring and using
- Extended possibilities for creation more complex virtual endpoints (db support, data stores, team using, etc.)
- Other deeper criteria
Thank you.
Best Regards,
Dzianis Sushko
EPAM Integration Competency Center