Jens NeuhausEnterprise Architect SAP Solutions at a computer software company
Jan ToebakManager Application Delivery Management at a pharma/biotech company
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"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."
"I can only judge based on the situation that we had around six years ago when we did the tool evaluation. Worksoft was not the cheapest, but it provided the value. For 25 concurrent licenses, we paid more than €400,000, so it was not cheap. In the end, if you see how much time you are saving and compare it with others, its price is okay. We had also compared its cost with the licensing costs for HP and Tricentis, and they were at another level. Now, as we have already booked the licenses, we only have to pay an annual maintenance fee, which is 70%, and that is okay."
"Qualibrate is realistically priced. I can't compare it because I haven't looked at other tools, but I think it is good. What I like is you can simply add new users, if you want. It has a license model that comes with different types of users, which I think makes sense."
"Automated testing is not cheap. But other companies, for example, Panaya, required a minimum of 10 licenses. Qualibrate allowed us to start small, with three licenses, with a price that was competitive within the market."
"We signed a three-year contract and the pricing is in line with our expectations."
Earn 20 points
Parasoft SOAtest is ranked 28th in Functional Testing Tools while Qualibrate is ranked 18th in Functional Testing Tools with 3 reviews. Parasoft SOAtest is rated 0.0, while Qualibrate is rated 9.0. On the other hand, the top reviewer of Qualibrate writes "Enables us to test much more frequently and provide functional maintenance feedback quickly". Parasoft SOAtest is most compared with SonarQube, Postman, Coverity, SoapUI Pro and Tricentis Tosca, whereas Qualibrate is most compared with Tricentis Tosca.
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.