Before this, we had the Performance Center tool, which was a Micro Focus tool. They are in the same line. Performance Center was on-premises, whereas LoadRunner Cloud is vendor-hosted. The base functionalities remain mostly the same. The main difference is the way we access them.

Performance Center only supported IE. Users using a MacBook could not access Performance Center, whereas LoadRunner Cloud is cross-browser. We can access the tool from any browser, which is very helpful, so one of the reasons for moving from Performance Center to LoadRunner Cloud was that LoadRunner Cloud supported different browsers, and accessing it was easy.

We are being forced to move to OpenText LoadRunner Cloud because Silk Performer is going to end of life. We were Silk Performer clients for over 20 years at the bank. It is going to reach the end of life this year, so we were forced to pick a new product. 

We used Performance Center for ten years. We compared other solutions and decided to switch from standalone to SaaS-based. So, we went with LoadRunner Cloud. We felt that it was a bit expensive, but feature-wise, it was pretty much on par with products from competitors. Also, we didn't see any issues with scalability when we ran a higher competency task.

Other tools are available in the industry, but they're not user-friendly, or they have limited features. Some have issues with scalability.

We use NeoLoad and JMeter.

We have used similar solutions like JMeter and NordLayer. LoadRunner's compatibility with mainframe systems, along with other monitoring tools like BMC Patrol, sets it apart from other options we have tried.

We also use HP ALM for functional testing.

I always thought it would be good to have something like this from HPE because we rely a lot on HPE. Then, StormRunner was released and I knew where exactly it was going and what's it would be for us.

We have used StormRunner and JMeter before. Also, we are doing a proof-of-concept for NeoLoad.

We were using another HPE product, Performance Center. We haven't totally switched, but StormRunner Load is our option for the test where we need a lot of virtual users where we can run it in the cloud. Whereas, on Performance Center, you have to have load generators in-house, or what HPE provides. That's why we use it. It's for when we want to use a lot and perform a big test.

We are in the process of adopting a SaaS based option, this led us to evaluate a bunch of tools.

No previous solution used.

We were previously using LoadRunner for our customer, but we needed something that could be used in the cloud. I advised the customer to buy StormRunner Load as given the time frame it was clear from the beginning that we needed to use the true client scripts. We didn't want to set up the memory foot print for them so we had to go to cloud.

We were using Performance Center to run performance tests, so we had to switch to StormRunner to run high concurrency tests.

We use LoadRunner extensively for Performance testing.

There was no solution in place previously.

There was no previous solution in place.

I have used some open-source tools and LoadRunner Cloud is more straightforward to use.

Utilized a different HP toolset (ALM/PC) for performance testing. SRL provided a better solution from a pricing and scaling perspective.