We performed a comparison between IBM Rational Test Workbench and OpenText UFT Digital Lab based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, OpenText, Tricentis and others in Performance Testing Tools."This solution provides for API testing, functional UI testing, performance testing, and service virtualization."
"Reporting is pretty good. Its interface is also good. I'm overall pretty happy with the functionality and use of IBM Rational Test Workbench."
"For automation testing, the tool provides the record and playback option, which helps with object detection easily."
"The solution is easy to use. There are features to orchestrate mobile testing, including mobile testing automation. You can test different devices at the same time."
"The fact that it allows users to test on real mobile devices instead of emulators is something that projects have told us is beyond compare."
"It is a complete solution for mobile application testing."
"The product is easy to use."
"There are numerous valuable features such as automation, the ones that facilitate importing and synchronization capabilities between our platform, Jira, and Azure DevOps."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is virtualization."
"It should have more interfaces. In terms of interfaces or protocols, what you can do with Rational is far limited as compared to other products out there. What it does, it does great, but it only gives you limited types of protocols. It supports between 8 to 15 types of protocols, whereas other test tools give you 20 to 30 types of protocols with which you can do testing and convert to script. It records Javascript-based scripts, and you got to know a little bit of Java to basically be able to edit them, but the level of editing you got to do is very low. I like that, but the ability to edit the script is not as good as Parasoft or LoadRunner, which have C-Script."
"There are a number of things that they can do to simplify the tools, but the most important thing that they need to do is simplify the installation."
"We need to scale devices easily. Some customers would like to loop in AWS or other cloud providers to check if their devices have the cloud factor. OpenText UFT Digital Lab needs to improve it."
"I would like to see more integration with automation tools."
"We like to host the tools centrally. We would need them to be multi-tenants, so different projects could log on and have their own set of devices and their own set of apps, and they wouldn't see data from other projects that are using it."
"For the most part, the key challenge is ensuring that customers fully utilize the product as intended and adopt the appropriate frameworks to implement the solutions effectively."
"The documentation and user interface both need improvement."
"They should introduce a pay-per-use subscription model."
"The product's object detection method needs to be improved since it can help testers do perfect testing."
Earn 20 points
IBM Rational Test Workbench is ranked 18th in Performance Testing Tools while OpenText UFT Digital Lab is ranked 6th in Mobile App Testing Tools with 16 reviews. IBM Rational Test Workbench is rated 7.6, while OpenText UFT Digital Lab is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of IBM Rational Test Workbench writes "Good reporting and interface, but supports limited types of protocols and requires low-level script editing". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText UFT Digital Lab writes "Robust solution for application lifecycle management with numerous valuable features". IBM Rational Test Workbench is most compared with HCL OneTest, whereas OpenText UFT Digital Lab is most compared with OpenText UFT One, Appium, Perfecto, AWS Device Farm and Sauce Labs.
We monitor all Performance 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.
