Judy ZemanQA Manager at Carrier Global Corp.
Asya KundushProduct Manager at a tech services company
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"With autotesting, we have been able to eliminate duplication of test cases across those four areas. This has helped us knock down our number of test cases. Our test cases are also running more optimally. Therefore, it has very much helped in that sense, so we were able to eliminate a lot of test cases and get out of manual silos by running on autotesting, which is more efficient."
"It is a pretty easy tool to use as far as automated testing tools go."
"The biggest feature is the fact that it's codeless. It takes away the problem of finding people with the correct programming language, since there are multiple such languages. It saves time in introducing people to the solution because they don't need programming knowledge, they just need to be able to think logically. This makes it vastly usable by more people who are not even acquainted with IT at all."
"It does allow for good reusability. When it's designed properly and utilized properly, we can put things in a way that allows for reusability, meaning a lot of reuse of VA01, if they're very similar flows, to keep it simple."
"Certify integrates with other tools and it works very well with other machine testing applications."
"It's pretty seamless with SAP and Salesforce because they've built in the field definitions and all the things that you need. You literally turn it on and execute your script and it records it. It's very simple. Then you can go back and put in some of the other functions. For example, instead of hard-coding field selections, you put in a data table so you can run it multiple times or with multiple data. It was actually written to work very well with SAP."
"Certify's web UI testing abilities for testing of modern applications like SAP Fiori was good when we started and they developed it to be even better. We all know that web applications can change objects in DOM quite fast and it breaks tests. To counter it Certify has made object recognition more flexible and generic, so we don't have any troubles."
"The scripting methodology is easy to learn. It is easy to maintain because it is presented in a simple, narrative way. You don't need to know programming." "It has reduced our test maintenance time by more than 50 percent because we don't have to do manual test processes. We have saved over 150 man-hours monthly. It has increased our delivery times. We went from 200 man-hours down (three weeks work time frame) to approximately 40 man-hours (three days work time frame)."
"They have a feature where they can record traffic and create tests on the report traffic."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is Collections."
"We can also submit requests multiple times and it allows us to capture the response each time by using utility scripts."
"The interface and the different types of API methods you can use are the most valuable aspects of this solution."
"The variables part is good. We can easily define the variables and we don't have to manually do a change every time, it gets automatically updated."
"No coding required."
"What is most valuable for me is that we can create and share collections between the team members."
"The user-interface is very good."
"It is nice to have different workspaces. You have your personal workspace, and then you have a team workspace. In general, I like its UI. It is quite cool."
"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."
"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."
"An area that I would like to see improved is how the permissions are applied. If you're applying permissions groups to a user, one of the options is to delete the group entirely and lose the entire permission group, rather than just deleting the permission from the user, which seems a little silly. In my opinion, that whole module of permissions is very confusing and lends itself to common errors."
"Pricing is a bit high and we would like to have the availability of a trail environment for beginners and training would be great to have and easier to expand and use by more and more consultants."
"Better automation capability would be helpful."
"With the codeless process automation across packaged applications, once in a while, if we get a weird application that's not widely used, it gets a little stickier. First, the software has to learn the fields, so you have to identify all the fields. Once you do that, as long as there isn’t any non-standard code in the application, then it works fine. But there's that one step that you have to do, a step you don't have to do with SAP and Salesforce, for example."
"When it comes to mobile testing, we have a small bottleneck there. You have to buy third-party separate licenses if you want to test on a mobile. Business wise we see room for improvement there, although it's that really critical for us."
"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 product is very slow to start up, and that is a bit of a problem, actually."
"I have display issues in my Windows that need to be fixed."
"I would like that if you click on one of the fields you should be able to see the entire row of fields, names, and values."
"The pricing should be adjusted for the Pro plan."
"If we have a certain build on one machine it won't work with another build even if we are using the same URL. It would give us a connection refuse. So developing environment compatibility would make it better."
"Could be more user friendly."
"An area that needs some improvement would be to allow multiple windows with different collections to be open at the same time."
"There needs to be more flexibility surrounding the testing of SOAP APIs."
"I have recently noticed that, for some reason, I am not able to import collections in JSON. It is weird because I was able to do it before. When you create a new collection and documentation, in tests, you usually have to click Save. If you don't click Save, your collections don't sync with other devices, which is something I don't like. It is not clear for the users in a shared workspace, and I usually forget to click Save and end up losing all the collections that I created. I create a lot of routes, and clicking Save all the time isn't efficient. Instead of clicking Save all the time, there should be an option to save everything in one go."
"There is a cost involved to doing it, but once you get over the initial cost, then you'll start reaping the benefits and seeing that testing is getting done more quickly and efficiently. We are still early on with it, but the expectation and what we're seeing is that we will start seeing some savings coming out on the back-end once we have this done."
"The price is in line with everyone else's in the market. They are not cheaper nor more expensive than anyone else who was in our RFP."
"The initial investment is probably a little high. It was a little hard for me to sell, but it was a one-shot deal and that's why it's so high. All we are doing now is paying annual maintenance, which we don't have to do if we don't want upgrades, but we do."
"Purchasing and licensing are okay. Go for the perpetual licenses. In that way, you own a license, then you can purchase maintenance and support on top of that, so you don't have to pay every year for it. Even if you don't want it a contract with Worksoft Certify in the future, you will have your own license of it. Then, if your usage is not that much, you can have one or two perpetual licenses. However, if you want to run your processes, you will need more licenses, e.g., using the run-only licenses. They are really cheap compared to the full licensing."
"They do have a confusing licensing structure."
"We are currently using the free version, but we have plans to buy a license."
"We are using the free version that is available."
"Its price is moderate as compared to other competitors. The version that we are using is not open source, so it is not free."
Earn 20 points
Postman's Tools Support Every Stage of the API Lifecycle. Through design, testing and full production, Postman is there for faster, easier API development - without the chaos.
Parasoft SOAtest is ranked 9th in API Testing Tools with 1 review while Postman is ranked 7th in API Testing Tools with 8 reviews. Parasoft SOAtest is rated 9.0, while Postman is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Parasoft SOAtest writes "Creates tests automatically based on recorded traffic". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Postman writes "We can easily define the variables and it gets automatically updated". Parasoft SOAtest is most compared with SonarQube, SoapUI Pro, Coverity, Tricentis Tosca and Selenium HQ, whereas Postman is most compared with Apache JMeter, SoapUI Pro, Katalon Studio, Apigee and Tricentis Tosca.
See our list of best API Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all API 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.