We performed a comparison between OpenText Silk Test and Sauce Labs based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Katalon Studio and others in Test Automation Tools."The ability to develop scripts in Visual Studio, Visual Studio integration, is the most valuable feature."
"The statistics that are available are very good."
"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."
"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 major thing it has helped with is to reduce the workload on testing activities."
"Sauce Lab analytics helped us to get detailed knowledge on test cases execution and logs."
"The custom capabilities that can be provided to Sauce Labs VMs during automated testing sessions are a valuable option for experimental or niche testing."
"I find that the multitude of browser and OS versions are very helpful for broadening testing scope."
"As stated earlier we use Sauce Labs for a combination of automated testing and manual testing. Therefore the most useful features are the ability to run the functional automated tests via a Sauce Labs tunnels which allows access to applications in our internal network. The second most useful feature is the manual side."
"Our machines are mostly Windows. Being able to test with Safari, on a Mac, and other types of browser pieces without having to manage all the infrastructure is the biggest feature that our team enjoys."
"It provides a comprehensive selection of browsers and platform versions for our test automations and CI/CD pipeline process. It also provides a comprehensive set of virtual mobile devices, which we can configure for our automation and availability. These features are valuable for us when it comes to testing our applications. We have a website and mobile applications that we want to test and diversify to various browsers and mobile devices as well as restore various versions. This helps us to find bugs that users might be facing and correct them."
"The most valuable feature is the cross-browser feature, it has many android and iOS devices both simulators and real devices. It's easy to integrate. I also like video recording too."
"So far, the stability has proven to be quite good."
"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."
"Could be more user-friendly on the installation and configuration side."
"Everything is very manual. It's up to us to find out exactly what the issues are."
"They should extend some of the functions that are a bit clunky and improve the integration."
"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."
"The support for automation with iOS applications can be better."
"This product is not super scalable, because you have a very specific number of VMs that you can use."
"We had some specific features that we opened tickets on, although they were not earth-shattering. For example, the way the menus scroll could be improved because it does not have a bar, the way that people are used to, where you can move up and down."
"Sauce Labs needs to be improved in the different platforms for farm testing, like iOS and Android farm testing and farm testing web browsers."
"Latency, due to Sauce Labs being a cloud-based solution, has been a concern. We work in different continents and countries, but last time I checked, Sauce Labs was only offering two data centers, one in the EU and another in the US. If you're not in either of those two places, you would have latency and issues running your test cases."
"As a web product QA team, we sometimes need to spot check some new child site on multiple browsers and OS(es). It was a little time consuming for us since we need to click on each of the browser/OS combinations and start a new session to test. Every sprint, with new features and child pages being added, we mostly need to do the same steps over and over again."
"Another feature that could still be improved on is more error clarity. Sometimes when running automated scripts the test will fail on the device side instead of the script and errors only show a 500 try again message instead of a detailed script that could of a been a timeout error from the code."
"With the desktop browser, we can inspect any screen with the web developer option, but they should provide something for mobiles so that we can quickly inspect elements on the device. To write the Selenium scripts, we require web locators. We have to capture them from the local and execute the script on Sauce Labs. If Sauce Labs can provide a solution where we can inspect any of the mobile devices online, it will be very helpful for us."
"The ability to install profiles on iOS real mobile devices should be included."
Earn 20 points
OpenText Silk Test is ranked 24th in Test Automation Tools while Sauce Labs is ranked 13th in Test Automation Tools with 111 reviews. OpenText Silk Test is rated 7.6, while Sauce Labs is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of OpenText Silk Test writes "Stable, with good statistics and detailed reporting available". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sauce Labs writes "Robust documentation, helpful support representative, good licensing model". OpenText Silk Test is most compared with Selenium HQ, OpenText UFT One, OpenText UFT Developer, Apache JMeter and froglogic Squish, whereas Sauce Labs is most compared with BrowserStack, Perfecto, LambdaTest, OpenText UFT One and Katalon Studio.
See our list of best Test Automation Tools vendors, best Functional Testing Tools vendors, and best Regression Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Test Automation 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.