We performed a comparison between OpenText UFT Developer and TestProject 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."Integrates well with other products."
"It is quite stable, and it has got very user-friendly features, which are important in terms of maintaining our scripts from a long-term perspective. It is very stable for desktop-based, UI-based, and mobile applications. Object repositories and other features are also quite good."
"One aspect that I like about Micro Focus UFT Developer is the ability to integrate it into a testing framework as a library."
"The cost is the most important factor in this tool."
"This tool is really good. We don't need to write any code, but it writes the code itself, only record and play. And it is simple, and it is not heavy; I mean, it doesn't have a large footprint, and it works well for us."
"There are many good things. Like it is intuitive and scripting was easy. Plus the availability of experienced resources in India due to its market leadership."
"The most valuable feature for UFT is the ability to test a desktop application."
"It's a complete pursuit and it's a logical pursuit working with HPE."
"The automation and AI are very good."
"Since implementing this solution, our code management has been reduced by 40% to 60%."
"It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution."
"Ability to carry out automatic testing without having coding knowledge."
"The ease of web and mobile functional testing is pretty easy on TestProject."
"The script-less part of it was good for novice users."
"The price of the solution could improve."
"UFT is like a flagship of testing tools, but it's too expensive and people are not using it so much. They should work on their pricing to make themselves more competitive."
"The product has shown no development over the past 10 or 15 years."
"The support from Micro Focus needs a lot of improvement."
"Integration with other tools can become a costly exercise."
"Easier connectivity and integration with SAP would be helpful."
"In the next release, I would like to see integration with different cloud-based tools such as Azure."
"It would be improved by adding a drag-and-drop interface to help alleviate the coding."
"TestProject needs better support for integration with other products to provide a better overall solution for test planning and test data management."
"I and some other experts may be able to understand the solution's reporting system, but a layperson won't understand it."
"The support is a weak point since they discontinued the tool."
"In an upcoming release, there should be a SaaS offering available."
"We'd like to see a direct cloud from TestProject instead of some other third party."
"Difficult trying to configure on more than one browser."
OpenText UFT Developer is ranked 14th in Test Automation Tools with 34 reviews while TestProject is ranked 16th in Test Automation Tools with 6 reviews. OpenText UFT Developer is rated 7.4, while TestProject is rated 7.2. The top reviewer of OpenText UFT Developer writes "Integrates well, has LeanFT library, and good object detection ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of TestProject writes "An easy-to-use tool that saves time and functions within a limited budget". OpenText UFT Developer is most compared with OpenText UFT One, Tricentis Tosca, OpenText Silk Test, froglogic Squish and Original Software TestDrive, whereas TestProject is most compared with Katalon Studio, Tricentis Tosca, Testim and SmartBear TestComplete. See our OpenText UFT Developer vs. TestProject report.
See our list of best Test Automation 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.
