We performed a comparison between OpenText UFT One and Xamarin Platform based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Perforce and others in Functional Testing Tools."I like the fact that you can record and play the record of your step scripts, and UFT One creates the steps for you in the code base. After that, you can alter the code, and it's more of a natural language code."
"Has improved our organization by allowing us to obtain fast, detailed information about the behavior of our products and to supply this to the customer, enabling us to work together without the need for special programming knowledge."
"The most valuable feature for me is that it works on multiple platforms and technologies."
"It's easy to use for beginners and non-technical people."
"The entire framework is very useful. It's easily integrable with Excel."
"Being able to automate different applications makes day-to-day activities a lot easier."
"For traditional automation, approximately half of our tests end up automated. Therefore, we are saving half the testing time by pushing it off to automation. That gives it an intrinsic benefit of more time for manual testers and business testers to work on possibly more important and interesting things. For some of our applications, they don't just have to do happy path testing anymore, they can go more in-depth and breadth into the process."
"The most valuable feature of Micro Focus UFT One is you are able to use it with many other technologies. I have not had an instance where the solution was not able to automate or execute automation. I was able to use COBOL to manage some automation."
"You can create one solution in C Sharp."
"We very much like the XAML design techniques, multiple layout and pages, MVVMCross support, and portability across different platforms."
"The most important impact is the reduction in product lifecycle costs."
"Xamarin.Forms reduced the effort and time to build and market our solution, market our features, and get our solution into production."
"The most valuable feature of the Xamarin Platform is that both the UI are the same in Android and iOS, in one project and Android and iOS, are applications for developing PCL projects. Additionally, the dashboard is good."
"The most valuable feature of the Xamarin Platform is the deployment."
"The initial setup is very simple."
"The most valuable features are: One language for all platforms: C#; XAML for UI in Xamarin.Forms; provides 100 percent coverage of APIs on each platform."
"One thing that confused me, and now just mildly irritates me, is that we migrated from QuickTest Pro to HP UFT, Unified Functional Test. After we did the migration, it turned out that we didn't really have Unified Functional Test at all."
"Micro Focus UFT One could benefit from creating modules that are more accessible to non-technical users. Without a developer background or at least basic knowledge of VBScript, using Micro Focus UFT One may not be feasible for everyone. This is something that Micro Focus, now owned by OpenText, should consider in order to cater to business professionals as well. While Micro Focus UFT One does have a recording function, it still requires a certain level of IT proficiency to create effective automation, which may be challenging for those outside of the technical field."
"The scripting language could be improved. They're currently using Visual Basic, but I think that people need something more advanced, like Python or Java."
"One of the drawbacks is that mobile performance testing is in need of improvement."
"You have to deal with issues such as the firewall and how can the tool talk with the application, i.e., if the application is on a company network and so on. That, of course, is important to figure out."
"The AI feature needs improvement. For banking applications, we input formatted text from documents, but the AI feature is recognizing three fields as one field, e.g., for a phone number, it puts all 10 digits in the international code or country code. Then, the script fails."
"We have had some issues with stability, where it crashes sometimes."
"The artificial intelligence functionality is applicable only on the web, and it should be expanded to cover non-web applications as well."
"I feel that the Android AppCompat library creates a lot of issues. A lot of development time is often wasted solving these issues."
"From time to time, it is a bit harder to code some specific scenarios compared to the native approach."
"The solution does not include Hot Reload which is painful because it causes us to wait quite some time for huge builds."
"We have noticed that there have been stability-based performance issues with this product, which need to be improved."
"We need to think about partnering with IBM because there is a need for a big data partner; someone who has machine learning and can help us connect the app to big data."
"There is limited support for UX widgets."
"I would like to see hot reload, similar to what Flutter has out-of-the-box. There is "Live Reload" but it’s still in preview and was only recently announced."
"We'd like to have some chat support functionality."
OpenText UFT One is ranked 2nd in Functional Testing Tools with 89 reviews while Xamarin Platform is ranked 6th in Mobile Development Platforms with 39 reviews. OpenText UFT One is rated 8.0, while Xamarin Platform is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of OpenText UFT One writes "With regularly occurring releases, a QA team member can schedule tests, let the tests run unattended, and then examine the results". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Xamarin Platform writes "It's about to be retired and replaced with an inferior product, but offers excellent cross-platform development capabilities". OpenText UFT One is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText UFT Developer, Katalon Studio, SmartBear TestComplete and UiPath Test Suite, whereas Xamarin Platform is most compared with Appium, Ionic, OutSystems, Apple Xcode and Mendix.
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.
