We performed a comparison between Eggplant Test and OpenText Silk Central based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText, Microsoft, IDERA and others in Test Management Tools."It provides very strong cross-platform support."
"We did see a massive return on investment from using Eggplant."
"The most valuable features would be the image recognition and the OCR."
"It is easy to set up."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to create code from a flow chart, and then run the code through it."
"The solution is a stable one."
"We are able to now automate tests, which so far have been manual."
"Everything is happening on the layout or display that is used by the user. Eggplant prompts processes, like 'click here,' or 'look for this image.' Eggplant makes it possible for QA people and BAs, working in the actual display, to check if the software is providing the right images, the right text, and the right results. They don't have to go inside the code or to the TCP/IP layer. Everything is happening at the highest level."
"The stability of this solution is very good. In our experience it is approximately ninety-nine percent."
"In terms of additional features, it would be helpful to have one package for all testing. You have the manager, the AI, then you have functional, and about 10 different packages for installing."
"I would like to see standardized actions already built into Eggplant. For example, "wait eight seconds". That way, I wouldn't need to create it as an action. Right now, I have to program that wait and describe it as an action so that everybody knows it is an action that waits eight seconds... That way, somebody who is not familiar with programming processes like "if-else", or "for", or "while", would be able, from the first moment, and without programming, to put some easy-to-use, standardized, actions in place."
"There was no free trial in it."
"Its performance and stability could be better."
"They need to update the Linux. I think it's kind of an outdated Java Swing application."
"It has low productivity."
"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 In particular, some of their online help and user support documentation is a little bit out of date and could be revised and updated on a more frequent basis.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 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."
"We would also like to manage the integration testing end-to-end."
Earn 20 points
Eggplant Test is ranked 7th in Test Management Tools with 16 reviews while OpenText Silk Central is ranked 20th in Test Management Tools. Eggplant Test is rated 7.8, while OpenText Silk Central is rated 7.8. 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 OpenText Silk Central writes "We have many possibilities to customize the utilization and we can also work easily at database level for custom reporting and to manage additional information and integration". Eggplant Test is most compared with Selenium HQ, Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, SmartBear TestComplete and froglogic Squish, whereas OpenText Silk Central is most compared with OpenText ALM / Quality Center, Zephyr Enterprise and TestRail.
See our list of best Test Management Tools vendors.
We monitor all Test Management 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.