We performed a comparison between Eggplant Test and Ranorex Studio based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Test Automation Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Its scalability is good. It is useful for desktop applications, and it also uses OCR and does image recognition."
"It provides very strong cross-platform support."
"We did see a massive return on investment from using Eggplant."
"The main feature of Eggplant Test is that it can do fully automated web testing and app testing."
"The features that we like the most are the developer interface and the ability to quickly develop and deploy tests."
"The solution is a stable one."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to create code from a flow chart, and then run the code through it."
"The most valuable features of Eggplant Digital Automation Intelligence are bug hunting and OCR technology."
"I'm from a UFT background, so Ranorex Studio has a similar feel in terms of how it handles objects. It just felt familiar even though I'd never seen it before. However, it doesn't have all the bells and whistles of UFT, but it's a pretty good start, and it's cost-effective."
"Code Conversion is one of the great features because sometimes, the automation tool doesn't have the capability of maneuvering around two specific evaluations."
"Easy integration with CI Tools like Jenkins, TFS, and TeamCity."
"The solution is stable."
"Data security was prime for us. Being able to download and run tests on our local machines was a big plus. The flexibility Ranorex offers in terms of customization is outstanding."
"The scalability is very good. It's probably one of the better tools I've seen on the market."
"The solutions's regression testing is very important for our company, as is the continuous integration process."
"The most valuable feature of Ranorex Studio is the capture and replay tool. You don't need to do script testing. When you launch any application from Ranorex Studio it automatically captures these test case steps. The next time you can replay the tool the flow automatically happens again. For example, when you do the logging and all the activity will be captured by the tool, and re-execute the same step by using automatization."
"A step forward would be to have event support, because it is more or less linear at the moment."
"Eggplant Digital Automation Intelligence could improve by lowering the price."
"If one area could be improved, it would be some of their documentation. In particular, some of their online help and user support documentation is a little bit out of date and could be revised and updated on a more frequent basis. Other than that, I haven't really found any issues or problems."
"The reporting function is a bit shallow. The solution does not offer very comprehensive reporting in terms of your test results. The reporting time and the logs are very high level as well. These areas need improvement."
"The solution would crash from time to time."
"Eggplant Test should emphasize on improving its offering in non-Windows environments."
"Its performance and stability could be better."
"The IDE could be even more full-featured. Because I was a developer, I was very spoiled by either Visual Studio Code or Visual Studio for shortcuts. For example, I was able to say "ctor" and hit Tab and it would create a template of a constructor for me... It would be great, when I want to create a new function, if there were shortcut commands like those that helped create all of the functions, or if there were shortcut features to do any of the complex plans."
"If there are many queries on the web page, Ranorex will not render the page correctly. I had about 1,000 queries on the page, and the solution was not able to handle it."
"Ranorex is used in Windows while other solutions, for example, Katalon Studio, are cross-platform. (But in my opinion, overall, Ranorex is better)."
"Part of the challenge is that Ranorex's support is over in Europe, so we can't get responses on the same day. If we had support in the United States that was a bit more timely, that would be helpful."
"I would like to be able to customize the data grids. They are currently written in Visual Basic and we are unable to get down to the cell level without hard-code."
"Binding to other sources is very good but the object recognition in .NET desktop applications often doesn't work."
"Other OS Support, Ranorex Spy performance improvement (Especially for Silverlight controls)."
"We are mainly working for manufacturing OEMs but the integration is not available. It would be a benefit if they built one integration tool for all the Teamcenter home servers and software as the main PLM data source. It is a simple process at this time, the integration could be made easier."
"I'd like to know their testing strategies and to know what they can automate and what they can't. It can become pretty frustrating if you're trying to automate something that changes on a monthly or weekly basis."
Eggplant Test is ranked 11th in Test Automation Tools with 16 reviews while Ranorex Studio is ranked 9th in Test Automation Tools with 46 reviews. Eggplant Test is rated 7.8, while Ranorex Studio is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Eggplant Test writes "Empowers effective test automation with comprehensive platform coverage and scalability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Ranorex Studio writes "Good data security, allowing local installations to prevent data from going to the internet". Eggplant Test is most compared with Selenium HQ, Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, SmartBear TestComplete and Sauce Labs, whereas Ranorex Studio is most compared with Katalon Studio, Tricentis Tosca, SmartBear TestComplete, froglogic Squish and Telerik Test Studio. See our Eggplant Test vs. Ranorex Studio report.
See our list of best Test Automation 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.