We performed a comparison between OpenText Business Processing Testing and OpenText Silk Test based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Perforce and others in Functional Testing Tools."This solution is very helpful to me. I use it to execute my use cases without a manual interface."
"The solution is quite stable with SAP. It's nice. I use it extensively."
"Scripting is the most valuable. We are able to record and then go in and modify the script that it creates. It has a lot of generative scripts."
"The feature I like most is the ease of reporting."
"The scalability of the solution is quite good. You can easily expand the product if you need to."
"A good automation tool that supports SAP functional testing."
"The ability to develop scripts in Visual Studio, Visual Studio integration, is the most valuable feature."
"The major thing it has helped with is to reduce the workload on testing activities."
"The statistics that are available are very good."
"There's only one thing that I think needs improvement. When I started off using this solution, I used the Google search engine to learn how to use the tool. I would also check with my colleagues who have a lot of knowledge about it. Selenium has fields of information available. If you click on that field there will be an explanation about how to use the tool. It will be very easier to understand it if Micro Focus included this feature. It is easy to find with the search button, but it would be a great help to the users who are new to this tool."
"The solution shouldn't be so tightly integrated with the ALM tool that they have. It should have its own base rather than the repository."
"The support for automation with iOS applications can be better."
"Everything is very manual. It's up to us to find out exactly what the issues are."
"The solution has a lack of compatibility with newer technologies."
"The pricing is an issue, the program is very expensive. That is something that can improve."
"Could be more user-friendly on the installation and configuration side."
"They should extend some of the functions that are a bit clunky and improve the integration."
"We moved to Ranorex because the solution did not easily scale, and we could not find good and short term third-party help. We needed to have a bigger pool of third-party contractors that we could draw on for specific implementations. Silk didn't have that, and we found what we needed for Ranorex here in the Houston area. It would be good if there is more community support. I don't know if Silk runs a user conference once a year and how they set up partners. We need to be able to talk to somebody more than just on the phone. It really comes right down to that. The generated automated script was highly dependent upon screen position and other keys that were not as robust as we wanted. We found the automated script generated by Ranorex and the other key information about a specific data point to be more robust. It handled the transition better when we moved from computer to computer and from one size of the application to the other size. When we restarted Silk, we typically had to recalibrate screen elements within the script. Ranorex also has some of these same issues, but when we restart, it typically is faster, which is important."
OpenText Business Processing Testing is ranked 37th in Functional Testing Tools while OpenText Silk Test is ranked 25th in Functional Testing Tools. OpenText Business Processing Testing is rated 7.8, while OpenText Silk Test is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of OpenText Business Processing Testing writes "Excellent usability, but the solution shouldn't be so tightly integrated with their ALM tool". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText Silk Test writes "Stable, with good statistics and detailed reporting available". OpenText Business Processing Testing is most compared with , whereas OpenText Silk Test is most compared with Selenium HQ, OpenText UFT One, OpenText UFT Developer, Apache JMeter and froglogic Squish.
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.
