We performed a comparison between OpenText UFT Developer and Worksoft Certify based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Functional Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution is very scalable."
"One aspect that I like about Micro Focus UFT Developer is the ability to integrate it into a testing framework as a library."
"This tool is really good. We don't need to write any code, but it writes the code itself, only record and play. And it is simple, and it is not heavy; I mean, it doesn't have a large footprint, and it works well for us."
"The most valuable feature for me is the number of protocols that can be tested. It not only tests Web, but also SAP, Siebel, .Net, and even pdf."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the number of plugins for object recognition. The predefined libraries allow us to automate tasks."
"The solution helps to accelerate software testing automation. It will help to reduce lead time and increase productivity and efficiency."
"The most valuable feature for UFT is the ability to test a desktop application."
"The most valuable feature is stability."
"The turn around time for getting the automation tester familiarized with the tool is very quick, as it doesn't have any coding. It is fairly simple to understand."
"We found that Worksoft is easier to use because our business experts can do the tests. We didn't have to have IT experts."
"The tool is easy to use. It is a drag and drop Microsoft type of solution."
"For this SAP upgrade or implementation, the business users are creating building blocks in their areas, then they're changing the building blocks into long end-to-end scripts to do a complete end-to-end testing to speed up the UAT. It definitely has a bigger coverage of UAT testing."
"The Capture 2.0 feature is good. Our clients like using it. It does not take long to create documentation."
"One of the bigger value-adds that we had was extracting data from our warning systems to be inputted into our new learning system."
"One big advantage of Worksoft Certify is its integration with SAP Solution Manager..."
"The most valuable features of Worksoft Certify are the way we can maintain the processes and sub-processes inside. We can immediately identify and replicate multiple objects in the application without having a major issue with it. We are able to do a lot of operations even with the solution being completely scriptless. That is a large advantage compared with other automation tools."
"Object definition and recognition need improvement, especially with calendar controls. I faced challenges with schedulers and calendars."
"The support for .NET Framework and Visual Studio in Micro Focus UFT Developer is currently limited. At present, only Visual Studio 2019 is supported, despite the release of a newer version (2022). Similarly, the tool only supports up to .NET Framework version 4.3.8, while there have been six newer versions released. This is an area that could be improved upon, particularly in the Windows environment."
"With Smart Bear products generally, you can have only one instance of the tool running on a machine."
"The parallel execution of the tests needs improvement. When we are running tests in LeanFT, there are some limitations in terms of running the same tests simultaneously across different browsers. If I'm running a test, let's say to log in, I should be able to execute it through IE, through Microsoft Edge, through Chrome, through Mozilla, etc. This capability doesn't exist in LeanFT. Parallel execution of the test cases across different browsers need to be added."
"Easier connectivity and integration with SAP would be helpful."
"In the next release, I would like to see the connectivity improved to be less complex and more stable."
"The pricing could be improved."
"In the next release, I would like to see integration with different cloud-based tools such as Azure."
"We ran into some issues with the version that we were on during the initial setup. We ran into a bug on one version, then they upgraded us to a new version, and we got hit with another bug. So, they had to put us in a beta. That was a little frustrating. However, besides the bugs that we ran into, the install was pretty straightforward."
"It would be great if our business testers could develop their own automated test cases. With every release you do, you have to go back and touch your old test cases and bring them up to speed, or develop new test cases. In the beginning, that is a challenge because you have to have someone who is certified in the tool to help you develop these test cases."
"We can use it for the web application, but we are facing stability-related challenges. The properties are getting changed. For example, when I am performing any operation on the text box but the development team has done some changes, our Worksoft scripts are getting changed. This is the main challenge that we are facing while developing tests for the web application in Worksoft Certify, where any changes in the backend are indirectly impacting our scripts. For the web application, there is a scarcity of resources. Unlike an SAP application that doesn't require much experience, for the web application, you require experienced people."
"Performance on the web UI part, especially with some of the more comprehensive Fiori features, like the complex tables that are being used, could be improved. In those cases we have noticed a lot of execution-time increase with regards to the Certify solution."
"Worksoft Certify needs a bit of improvement for its web-based processes. It can be difficult because you need to recall the maps, then you still have to add-on for your browser. When you are using the browser-based testing, you cannot even move your mouse or do anything on your system when you are using the web-based testing. Therefore, it needs a bit of improvement on that side. While it does work, it needs improvement. From the SAP side, there is nothing better than Worksoft Certify. However, from the web-based, we are moving towards Fiori. SAP will soon be totally web-based. For Fiori, they need to be great with SAP testing. Thus, Worksoft has to improve the web-based testing part for Certify."
"The definitions for the objects need to be automated. They need to be recognized automatically by Worksoft Certify instead of changing them back and forth manually. This is also something that Worksoft is currently working on."
"For the couple of the issues that we were really scratching our heads over, we were in communication with the technical support several times, but they never got back to us."
"I would like Worksoft Certify to do automation at any layer (the UI layer, API layer, or database layer) and challenge competitors in the RPA industry, like UiPath and Automation Anywhere."
OpenText UFT Developer is ranked 16th in Functional Testing Tools with 34 reviews while Worksoft Certify is ranked 6th in Functional Testing Tools with 64 reviews. OpenText UFT Developer is rated 7.4, while Worksoft Certify is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of OpenText UFT Developer writes "Integrates well, has LeanFT library, and good object detection ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Worksoft Certify writes "Enables us to automate end-to-end testing of our integration between S/4HANA and Salesforce.com". OpenText UFT Developer is most compared with OpenText UFT One, Tricentis Tosca, OpenText Silk Test, froglogic Squish and Original Software TestDrive, whereas Worksoft Certify is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Selenium HQ, OpenText UFT One, Katalon Studio and Panaya Test Dynamix. See our OpenText UFT Developer vs. Worksoft Certify report.
See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors and best Test Automation 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.
