IBM Rational Functional Tester Previous Solutions

KJ
CEO at Xcelliti

I've tried other solutions as well, but IBM is very good. We are very satisfied with IBM, though there are other similar tools available. The problem with them is that they do not cover many things the way IBM does. Often they do one task and then you have to connect them with something else in other to get what you need. It's much better to have a stable product with the full support and scalability required all in one place.

View full review »
it_user405666 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Consultant at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
PC
Test Specialist at a financial services firm with 201-500 employees

Prior to using IBM Rational Functional Tester, we used testing software by HP. It was the Unit Functional Tester and HP Quality Center that were later purchased by Micro Focus. I do not know the reasons that we switched to IBM.

View full review »
Buyer's Guide
Functional Testing Tools
April 2024
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM, OpenText, SeleniumHQ and others in Functional Testing Tools. Updated: April 2024.
767,995 professionals have used our research since 2012.
it_user203211 - PeerSpot reviewer
Test Team Lead at a healthcare company with 501-1,000 employees

We used HPE QTP and found IBM RFT to have better object recognition.

View full review »
it_user203841 - PeerSpot reviewer
Software Engineering Senior Analyst at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees

Based on low license cost and project decision we moved to this product.

View full review »
it_user175548 - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Lead - QA at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees

We were replacing an expensive solution - Worksoft Certify.

View full review »
Buyer's Guide
Functional Testing Tools
April 2024
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM, OpenText, SeleniumHQ and others in Functional Testing Tools. Updated: April 2024.
767,995 professionals have used our research since 2012.