Prashant SarswatHead - Testing Centre of Excellence at NIIT Technologies Limited
Vishwa-ReddyTest Automation Eng Senior Analyst at a tech services company
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"The initial setup and installation of the software were very easy and straightforward."
"The solution is quite stable."
"The load testing, reporting, and scripting features are all valuable features."
"I like the user interface. I like the way we can divide our scenarios and can tune them. The integration with the quality center is great. These features are really good."
"I think that analytics is very good and that the analytics features are very powerful."
"The reporting mechanism is a valuable feature that generates good reports."
"The most useful aspect of the solution is that it provides agents in different geographic locations."
"It has good protocol coverage."
"UFT has improved our ability to regression test."
"This product is easy to use, understand, and maintain."
"The production and the efficiency of making your test cases can be very high."
"The solution has good out-of-the-box protocols."
"The interface is fine and there is nothing else to add in terms of enhancement."
"The initial setup is relatively easy."
"On a scale of one to ten, I would give Micro Focus UFT One a 10 because it is a reliable product, it works, it's as good or better than similar solutions especially because you get technical support from real people. Additionally, upgrades are always provided on a consistent basis."
"It helps in identifying defects earlier. With manual testing, that 15-day timeline meant there were times when we would find defects on the 11th or 12th day of the cycle, but with automation we are able to run the complete suite within a day and we are able to find the failures. It helps us to provide early feedback."
"Sometimes we are not be able to click on some of the buttons due to the screen mismatching and compatibility issues."
"I guess scalability becomes a problem when you use things like TruClients."
"The solution needs to reduce its pricing. Right now, it's quite expensive."
"The solution uses a lot of memory and then it dies. It's difficult to work with the solution sometimes when you run a scenario it dies. They need to make the solution lighter somehow."
"I would like to have better support for adding more users per load generator."
"The debugging capability should be improved."
"The solution is very costly. The cost is very high, especially considering a lot of other resources are available now and they are less expensive. For a small organization, it is very difficult to sustain the costs involved in having the solution or the related fees"
"The product is not stable and reliable in the version we are currently using."
"It could work with more browsers other than Internet Explorer, and could better handle new things like Ext JS."
"One of the drawbacks is that mobile performance testing is in need of improvement."
"The price is very high. They should work to lower the costs for their clients."
"Technical support could be improved."
"We have had some issues with stability, where it crashes sometimes."
"The overall design needs an entire overhaul. We prefer software designed to ensure the package isn't too loaded."
"They need to reduce the cost because it is pretty high. It's approximately $3,000 per user."
"We used to run it as a test suite. Micro Focus provides that in terms of a test management tool as ALM, but when we think of integrating with a distributed version control system, like Jenkins, there isn't much integration available. That means we need to make use of external solutions to make it work."
"The licensing fees are based on the number of users."
"It is competing with other products that may cost significantly less or may be available as open-source. Because of that it is relatively expensive."
"LoadRunner Professional is an expensive product."
"This is not a cheap product."
"There is a licensing cost that is expensive."
"The price is only $3,000. I don't know how many QA analysts you would have in any given company. Probably no more than five or 10. So if it's a large corporation, it can easily afford $15,000 to $25,000. I don't see that being an issue."
"The way the pricing model works is that you pay a whole boatload year one. Then, every year after, it is around half or less. Because instead of paying for the new product, you are just paying for the support and maintenance of it. That is probably one of the biggest things that I hear from most people, even at conferences, "Yeah, I would love to use UFT One, but we don't have a budget for it.""
"Compared to other tools in the market, UFT One is very competitive. The recent Covid pandemic situation also hit customer budgets significantly, so Micro Focus offered some discounted prices, which is definitely competitive."
"The pricing fee is good. If someone makes use of the solution once a day for a half hour then the fee will be more expensive. For continuous use and application of the solution to different use cases, the fee is average."
LoadRunner is the Micro Focus industry-standard software solution for application performance and load testing. LoadRunner stresses your entire system to isolate and identify potential client, network, and server bottlenecks, supporting performance testing of new technologies together with your existing, legacy applications.
Micro Focus UFT One simplifies end-to-end functional testing using intelligent test automation and embedded AI-based capabilities to accelerate testing across web, mobile, desktop, mainframe, API, and composite and packaged enterprise-grade apps.
QA and Testing teams can efficiently scale tests across distributed infrastructures and in parallel on web and mobile; script once and replay all tests with cross-browser support; and leverage a broad ecosystem of integrations from version control to continuous integration to agile and DevOps.
With support of 200+ technologies including SAP, Salesforce, Java, Citrix and more, UFT One increases test coverage from the UI to the API—and everything in between—for true multi-platform application testing.
Micro Focus UFT One is also known as Unified Functional Testing, Micro Focus UFT (QTP), QTP, Quick Test Pro, QuickTest Professional, HPE UFT (QTP).
Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional is ranked 2nd in Performance Testing Tools with 12 reviews while Micro Focus UFT One is ranked 2nd in Functional Testing Tools with 15 reviews. Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional is rated 8.0, while Micro Focus UFT One is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional writes "Very good controller and a market leader, but not cost effective for small business". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Micro Focus UFT One writes "Testers have been able to free up their time: instead of doing mundane, repetitive tasks, they shift them off to automation". Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional is most compared with Micro Focus LoadRunner Enterprise, Neotys NeoLoad, Apache JMeter, Micro Focus LoadRunner Cloud and Akamai CloudTest, whereas Micro Focus UFT One is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Micro Focus UFT Developer, SmartBear TestComplete and Selenium HQ.
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.