Compare Fabasoft app.test vs. Visual Studio Test Professional

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, Worksoft, Micro Focus and others in Functional Testing Tools. Updated: September 2020.
442,041 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pricing and Cost Advice
Information Not Available
"For the cloud services option, you buy a subscription per account or per user. This costs around $52 a month per person.""I think that the pricing is quite good."

More Visual Studio Test Professional Pricing and Cost Advice »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
442,041 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Questions from the Community
Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Top Answer: The most valuable features are tools like IntelliSense and ReSharper.
Top Answer: The integration with Git needs improving because it is a bit disjointed and unpredictable. The diagrammatic representation of the database in the entity framework is helpful but it seems to have been… more »
Ranking
41st
Views
71
Comparisons
53
Reviews
0
Average Words per Review
0
Avg. Rating
N/A
9th
Views
3,597
Comparisons
2,928
Reviews
8
Average Words per Review
392
Avg. Rating
8.6
Popular Comparisons
Learn
Fabasoft
Microsoft
Overview

Fabasoft app.test is the tool for functional software test automation in the Fabasoft product realm. Fabasoft app.test focuses on the automation of tests in a way that simulates how a real user would interact with the applications, i.e. by driving the user interface in the web browser.

Visual Studio Professional Edition provides an IDE for all supported development languages. As of Visual Studio 2010, the Standard edition was dropped. MSDN support is available as MSDN Essentials or the full MSDN library depending on licensing. It supports XML and XSLT editing, and can create deployment packages that only use ClickOnce and MSI. It includes tools like Server Explorer and integration with Microsoft SQL Server also. Windows Mobile development support was included in Visual Studio 2005 Standard, however, with Visual Studio 2008, it is only available in Professional and higher editions. Windows Phone 7 development support was added to all editions in Visual Studio 2010. Development for Windows Mobile is no longer supported in Visual Studio 2010; it is superseded by Windows Phone 7.
Offer
Learn more about Fabasoft app.test
Learn more about Visual Studio Test Professional
Sample Customers
Envisage Information Systems, Computer Sciences Consulting, Österreichische Post AGTransport for Greater Manchester, Ordina, Bluegarden A/S, CLEAResult, Jet.com, OSIsoft, Australian Taxation Office, BookedOut, Tracasa
Top Industries
No Data Available
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company51%
Comms Service Provider13%
Insurance Company7%
Media Company7%
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, Worksoft, Micro Focus and others in Functional Testing Tools. Updated: September 2020.
442,041 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Fabasoft app.test is ranked 41st in Functional Testing Tools while Visual Studio Test Professional is ranked 9th in Functional Testing Tools with 8 reviews. Fabasoft app.test is rated 0.0, while Visual Studio Test Professional is rated 8.6. On the other hand, the top reviewer of Visual Studio Test Professional writes "Good integration between the management data and the test cases". Fabasoft app.test is most compared with , whereas Visual Studio Test Professional is most compared with Apache JMeter, TFS, Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional, Katalon Studio and Ranorex Studio.

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.