We just raised a $30M Series A: Read our story

Micro Focus UFT Developer OverviewUNIXBusinessApplication

Micro Focus UFT Developer is #8 ranked solution in top Test Automation Tools and #10 ranked solution in top Functional Testing Tools. IT Central Station users give Micro Focus UFT Developer an average rating of 8 out of 10. Micro Focus UFT Developer is most commonly compared to Micro Focus UFT One:Micro Focus UFT Developer vs Micro Focus UFT One. Micro Focus UFT Developer is popular among the large enterprise segment, accounting for 87% of users researching this solution on IT Central Station. The top industry researching this solution are professionals from a computer software company, accounting for 31% of all views.
What is Micro Focus UFT Developer?

Micro Focus UFT Pro (LeanFT) is a powerful yet lightweight functional test automation solution, that supports a wide range of AUT technologies. Targeted to technical test automation engineers and developers/testers in Agile teams, Micro Focus UFT Pro (LeanFT) is fully embedded in standard IDEs and integrates naturally with the Dev and QA ecosystems.

Micro Focus UFT Developer was previously known as UFT Pro (LeanFT), Micro Focus UFT Pro (LeanFT), LeanFT, HPE LeanFT.

Micro Focus UFT Developer Buyer's Guide

Download the Micro Focus UFT Developer Buyer's Guide including reviews and more. Updated: November 2021

Micro Focus UFT Developer Customers

Walmart, Hitachi, American Airlines, PepsiCo, AT&T, Ericsson, United Airlines

Micro Focus UFT Developer Video

Pricing Advice

What users are saying about Micro Focus UFT Developer pricing:
  • "It is cheap, but if you take the enterprise license, it is valid for both software items."
  • "When we compare in the market with other tools that have similar features, it may be a little bit extra, but the cost is ten times less."
  • "The licensing is very expensive, so often, we don't have enough VMs to run all of our tests."
  • "The cost of this solution is a little bit high and we are considering moving to another solution."
  • "Its cost is a bit high. From the licensing perspective, I am using a concurrent license. It is not a seed license. It is something that I can use in our network. It can also be used by other users."

Micro Focus UFT Developer Reviews

Filter by:
Filter Reviews
Industry
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Company Size
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Job Level
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Rating
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Considered
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Order by:
Loading...
  • Date
  • Highest Rating
  • Lowest Rating
  • Review Length
Search:
Showingreviews based on the current filters. Reset all filters
LQ
Systems Engineer at a aerospace/defense firm with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 20
Great features with good stability and an easy initial setup

Pros and Cons

  • "The solution is very scalable."
  • "The pricing could be improved."

What is our primary use case?

We primarily use the solution in order to test functionality on other applications. It does have the capability of screengrabbing, recording, test automation, implementation of test cases, et cetera. It's called Unified Functional Test and therefore it does these functional requirements of the application in question.

How has it helped my organization?

Let's say that we're going to test yahoo.com and there're changes on the yahoo.com page. You can either hire a whole bunch of people to test every button, every functionality, every menu that exists on yahoo.com, or you can use UFT to record one session and then play it back a thousand times. You can either hire a thousand people or hire one person to record that session. And then you can execute the test case a thousand times. It saves a lot of time and resources for a company, in that sense.

What is most valuable?

Every single feature on offer is valuable and useful. As long as it's a web-based tool, you can use this to test the application.

The initial setup is very easy.

The solution is very scalable.

The product offers very good stability.

What needs improvement?

The pricing could be improved. It's a bit high right now. They could make it more reasonable.

Currently, the functionalities do not exist on Ranorex or UFT, however, as the industry continues to evolve and put more applications into a mobile device, the implementation of testing in a mobile device, using either Ranorex or UFT or XYZ, et cetera is just a natural progression of their functionality. This world is not made of only PCs. The solution needs to offer mobile application testing.

That said, that is a very difficult requirement as one would expect that they would need to test across various platforms - including iOS, Android, Chrome, et cetera. Every mobile device seems to have its own standard. The mobile industry would need to also standardize a bit. However, that's not likely. There also hasn't been a unification of testing on mobile devices regardless of the browser.  

It requires a good discipline maturity and if the discipline is not there, I spend my time holding people's hands and showing them how to install everything, how to connect, et cetera. Without users with knowledge, users that understand coding, it's very hard to adopt the application.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using the solution for over a decade. It's been 12 years or so at this point. We've used it for a while.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The solution has been very stable. We just finished migrating the last group that was using 12.53 to 15. It's just very, very stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It is scalable with a minor effort from my end. What we do is provide the binaries. We provide a Wiki page for users to reference, and they can go get it themselves and follow the instructions. I can support one person or I can support a hundred people with the same amount of effort.

The majority of my users are testers and or test automators. I can't disclose how many users are using the application, however, definitely, it's in the range of more than ten and less than a hundred.

How are customer service and technical support?

Technical support is average. We are tier three support for our organization. If we cannot resolve a problem, then we lean on the technical support at Micro Focus. They have their own tiers. Most of the time when we ask for support, we get to their tier one support, and then they can't resolve that, they go to tier two, tier three, all the way to R&D. They have their own process, and we have our own process, however, for the most part, it's difficult to get a straight answer. That said, we have grown to have a good rapport with them so that they do not reference "Did you read the manual? Go to page number..." They now understand that when we call we have exhausted all our references and we need their help. It's a bit better than average at this point. We're mostly satisfied with the support on offer.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

I did not previously use a different solution. This is a new tool for me, and I have been supporting it for the last seven years.

How was the initial setup?

The setup is not complex at all. It's one of the easiest applications that I support. You get the binaries, double click as an administrator, and it deploys. The challenge is once it's installed on your machine, then you need to understand that you need to connect to ALM. You need to connect to the cloud server where your scripts are installed. You could use it as a stand-alone, however, for the most part, on an enterprise organization it's best to have a library of test cases that is on the application. In this case, with ALM, you can check out the ticket, check out the test case, execute it, and re-put it into the system for someone else to use.

the deployment is very fast. it only takes about ten minutes to install.

One of the challenges in large organizations is that on a user's laptop or machines, they may or may not have administrative access. You can install anything that you'd upload from the internet. Some organizations prevent that, so some users may need admin rights. If a user installs it without administration access, the application, UFT in this case, does not install all the components necessary for it to work properly.

The maintenance is all in the server, in the ALM server, the client. The maintenance you require for VCO is not very much, however, if VCO relies on a database of some sort, that you connect VCO to a server to get diagrams and they upload, that server requires maintenance, patches, an operating system, and re-indexing of the large components. That said, in terms of UFT, it's a fairly standalone application that requires almost no maintenance.

What was our ROI?

The return on investment for an organization is that the more people use it, the cost per capita reduces. If we buy these two for one person it's a very, very expensive solution. However, if we buy this product for 10 people, then now the return on investment is higher because we have more test automation, more testing, more analysis, more defects are found on different products, et cetera. You should never buy this product or any product only for a select group. It needs to be used by more people in order to benefit from a return on investment.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

The pricing of the solution is high. It's more than $10,000 per floating license. That's a yearly cost.

There are no additional costs on top of that, however.

What other advice do I have?

We are just customers and end-users.

This is a client-based application.

I'd advise other companies considering the solution to ensure that your organization is mature in the software development life cycle and that the organization has documentation, videos, and knowledge of where the testers can go for that information. It shouldn't be a repeat of a user's manual or a link to their documentation. They need to translate and synthesize the documentation into very bulleted items. 

If I have a user manual that is composed of five pages, I translate all that into three bullet items. The testers do not have time to go and read five pages. First of all, find out where the information is then find five pages of the manual. They might rather go to my tool aides and go bullet item, bullet item, bullet item, and done. Support group needs to put themselves in the shoes of the tester and synthesize the information into succinct and quick tool aides. While it would be easier for me to just put a link to a user manual, which is about a 2,000-page document, no one is going to go through it. 

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten as it requires a junior or senior tester that has done test automation before. You can't take a guide that likes to make diagrams and create test cases. It needs to be the lines of code. You need people who know the programming language. If you don't have that background, it is a very complicated tool for first-time users.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate
AS
Programator at a computer software company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Easy to deploy and automates many C# test scenarios in my hardware simulator

Pros and Cons

  • "The most valuable feature is the automation of test cases."
  • "The support from Micro Focus needs a lot of improvement."

What is our primary use case?

I am a software developer and at my company, we use this solution for testing a banking ATM application that is written in C#. There is a customer screen that is part of a simulator for physical devices and different scenarios such as card and PIN entry have to be tested. Example test cases can be things like insufficient funds to dispense or it does not have the required bills. Another might be that the printer raises a hardware error. There are approximately 500 scenarios to test and in some, it will reject the transaction.

We have UFT deployed on a TFS server and the test agents are running the scenarios on virtual machines.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable feature is the automation of test cases.

What needs improvement?

UFT is sometimes difficult to run. For example, the customer application is represented by an embedded browser control, waiting for input. If I want to recognize the browser then I need to first start the UFT Pro environment. This can be done from Visual Studio or the management console. The problem is that UFT is not able to identify the object that is inside the browser. In one of my test cases where I have to select the card, I need to right-click on a picture and then select an item from a drop-down menu. I had opened a ticket in version 14.02 and I spent two weeks speaking with people from Nigeria, trying to convince them that there is a bug in the software. I was finally redirected to the engineers who solved the bug, but they sent me a DLL patch as opposed to an official update.

The support from Micro Focus needs a lot of improvement.

My simulator is able to create a receipt as if it were printed from the ATM. However, in the current version of UFT, I am not able to perform an OCR on it correctly. The accuracy is about 20%. When I told support that our code was written in C#, they showed us some Java code and were convinced that it would work simply by using Java instead of C#.

I would like the Object Finder Application Center to be improved. It is a plugin that is used to recognize the object on the screen, but it runs very slowly and crashes often.

For how long have I used the solution?

We have been working with UFT since 2017, almost three years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

I am currently having some issues with stability, although I'm not sure if it can be attributed to UFT Pro or the virtual machine. The errors require me to restart. It may have to do with the simulated environment being 32-bit where the maximum memory is four gigabytes. It is possible that there is an error in the configuration of our virtual machine.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

I think that this solution is scalable.

All of our test cases run automatically and this solution is used by our entire team, which is about 15 people.

How are customer service and technical support?

I would rate technical support a one out of five.

When I ask for something on the Micro Focus page, I never get a reply. It also took me a long time to get a reply and the answers that I received did not always fit my inquiry.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

Prior to my work with UFT Pro and C#, two others had been writing tests using UFT Basic. This requires that the tests be written in Visual Basic. They are very slow and the Visual Basic version generates a lot of duplicate code. The C# version allows me to use a special library that helps to avoid code duplication.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is straightforward. The deployment took about two hours.

The only issue we had is that the ACL needed to be configured with the firewall.

What about the implementation team?

I deployed UFT Pro on my own.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

I did evaluate other options in the interest of changing solutions.

I tried UFT Testpack, which is a library for testing but it isn't very scalable. I also tried Atrium from Selenium, but it only works on Windows 10 and it is unable to automate Java Swing applications. There is a software application from SmarteSoft that is written in Java, but I didn't find a tool that was capable of automating this application.

What other advice do I have?

I requested a trial of the most recent version and I have not yet received a response.

The biggest lesson that I have learned from using this solution is that I cannot automate everything. That had been my initial goal.

Even with the problems that I have mentioned, I think that this is one of the best solutions on the market right now. I tried changing solutions but I was not able to fully automate my application. If they just improve the support then it would be great.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Learn what your peers think about Micro Focus UFT Developer. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: November 2021.
554,148 professionals have used our research since 2012.
SP
Framework Architect and Test Automation Specialist at a government with 5,001-10,000 employees
Real User
Top 20
All our tests are run unattended, automated, and on remote servers

Pros and Cons

  • "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."
  • "With Smart Bear products generally, you can have only one instance of the tool running on a machine."

What is our primary use case?

We have many data centers, and the infrastructure for these is moving to the Amazon cloud. They are working towards a total transformation. We have a lot of mobile applications. Some of these are Java-based, but a number of them are Angular and Ionic-based. Here, our usage is as a simple record and playback utility. We perform unit testing as a one-off operation, and once we complete development tasks, we do the unit testing. Our developers only have two machines, one for .NET and one for Java. There is no commitment to buy these tools by their licensed permit.

How has it helped my organization?

We haven't got the full suite. We had only UFT regular 14.53. They have now the UFT Developer. This is for the developers to perform unit testing. It improves our testing processes.

What is most valuable?

Our developers only use it for record and play. They use Java but don't need to understand much programming knowledge, so this helps. They don't check the end-to-end flow or regression, which is really only required when we have a new build, so it makes the job easier. It is also both mobile and Windows-based. The app development team has recommended the UFT Developer version, as this is cheaper. All our tests are run unattended, automated, and they run on remote servers. The Java and .NET programmers have said that "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."

What needs improvement?

With Smart Bear products generally, you can have only one instance of the tool running on a machine. Whereas with Selenium, you can have five instances of the test on a single machine. The lack of multiple instance capability is not as useful.

For how long have I used the solution?

We have been using UFT for a decade or more. This is my 8th year in the Information Technology services wing. Previously, I was working on the application development regression team. I am now in the newly formed digital enterprise transformation team. It is mostly cloud-based.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It is a stable product for our usage, which is mainly recorded and play actions. We also do functional testing via our automation team. They are not developers but know UFT well. We also use it for end-to-end testing. Any instability is detected via these internal processes. Although we do not test the entire regression suite, we use it for thorough testing of all our processes, as we have several long test iterations.

How are customer service and technical support?

I didn't find them to be exceptionally good. They are very slow, and for every problem, they want you to raise a ticket. Very often, they are not available or open. We often have to close tickets due to a lack of a timely response.

How was the initial setup?

UFT setup is absolutely straightforward. Out of the box, they provide a DVD, and then you extract an executable file, and this performs the full installation process. All you need then is a valid license to use the software.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

It is cheap, but if you take the enterprise license, it is valid for both software items.

What other advice do I have?

I would rate the UFT product 8 out of 10. It's cheaper, but they also have an enterprise license. If you take it, you get the license for both. However, we don't use both.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Public Cloud

If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?

Amazon Web Services (AWS)
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate
Dhananjay Singh
Team Leader at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 20
Easy to use, the installation is clear, the support is good, and it has a good object recognition capability

Pros and Cons

  • "The cost is the most important factor in this tool."
  • "In the next release, I would like to see the connectivity improved to be less complex and more stable."

What is our primary use case?

In a very small location, we are using this solution for the infrastructure-related applications for testing and with a very low number of licenses, only two. 

We are planning to change to SAP S/4HANA.

What is most valuable?

The cost is the most important factor in this tool.

Feature-wise it's okay, and it's comparable with other tools. All of the features that we need for our testing are available. 

We have additional features such as reporting, and one other important feature, in UFT, is the AI-based object recognition plugin. This is a good feature in UFT.

What needs improvement?

UFT is more code-based, and we have to have knowledge of VB scripting to prepare the automation test cases. This is an area that is lagging behind with UFT.

One of the biggest challenges we face is not being able to easily interact with ALMs, other than HP ALM. This is an area that needs improvement.

In the next release, I would like to see the connectivity improved to be less complex and more stable. 

Also, they can improve the coding interfaces to be easier and closer to English or any other international language, rather than a programming language.

For how long have I used the solution?

I recently started with this solution just two months ago, but the company has been using this tool for ten years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

This solution is quite stable. We have been using it for ten years with no technical challenges involved.

At times, we do have some problems connecting with other ALMs because somehow it is a managed connection.

There are many sharp and live connectivities provided by the UFT with other ALMS. We may face some hacks at times.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

We have not yet explored this area, because we are extending our requirements and our requirement is not expanding a lot.

In the future, we have to scale it for mobile applications and for other non-UFT areas. We may have to purchase additional licenses for mobile testing.

I think that this tool is scalable, but have not used this feature yet.

How are customer service and technical support?

Technical support is good. 

They are very quick, the response time is very good. 

We are satisfied with the support.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was quite easy.

It's one installation file, then everything was just connected to the server. 

There is no complexity in the installation.

There are some tools in the market that are cloud-based and are much easier to use because you only have to log in and use it.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

Pricing is the biggest feature. When we compare in the market with other tools that have similar features, it may be a little bit extra, but the cost is ten times less.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We are planning to use SAPS/4HANA for migration testing and to have more licenses for more testers.

What other advice do I have?

If someone is starting right from the beginning, I would not recommend they go with UFT. Instead, I would recommend Tosca.

The good points in UFT are the cost, it's easy to use, the installation is quite clear, the licensing model is quite good, and the object recognition feature is very good.

The con is that the code-based it not a good thing. Tosca has better features in terms of analytical capabilities. The impact analysis is available in Tosca, yet not offered in UFT. 

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
David Gorecki
Senior Specialist - Quality Engineer at a financial services firm with 201-500 employees
Real User
Top 5
Does not work well for testing on VMs and it's not scalable at all, but is able to test desktop applications

Pros and Cons

  • "The most valuable feature for UFT is the ability to test a desktop application."
  • "I have to keep the remote machine open while the tests are running, otherwise, it leads to instability."

What is our primary use case?

This solution is used for testing. It is usually used with our Quality Center solution.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable feature for UFT is the ability to test a desktop application.

What needs improvement?

You need a more modern language to write test cases in because Visual Basic is not powerful enough.

I have to keep the remote machine open while the tests are running, otherwise, it leads to instability.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been working with Micro Focus UFT Developer since approximately 2011.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It can be very unstable. Basically, right now when I go running any of those test cases, I have to keep the remote machine that I'm running it on open, and can't minimize it or anything like that, because it's dependent on the actual location of the elements on the screen.

This is unlike Selenium, where you could run remotely and not have to log into the VM. On the UFT, you have to have it open and it's got to be up there. I'm assuming you are not running in on your own local machine, but rather in another environment. If you are running it on your own machine then it's going to be moving the mouse everywhere and you won't be able to get anything done. In my mind, this defeats the purpose of automation, to begin with, because you're stuck having to watch the testing.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

This solution is not scalable at all. We have a test suite of approximately 45 test cases and things take three and a half hours to complete. I've got to sit there watching it the entire time.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

I have worked with Selenium and while it is better in some ways, Selenium is not able to handle desktop applications

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

The licensing is very expensive, so often, we don't have enough VMs to run all of our tests.

What other advice do I have?

We have a lot of manual test cases that are still waiting to be imported into UFT. The way it was set up was that they imported Excel spreadsheets. They never went in and defined the test steps or integrated with our Jira requirements.

My advice for anybody who is implementing this product is to make sure that you've got your manual test steps documented somewhere for when the tests fail. In my case, I'm working with many tests that were written by other people. I'm trying to run them, and then debug when half of them are failing. There's no documentation around to explain what the tests were even supposed to be doing. So, the bottom line is to make sure that you've got documentation.

I would rate this solution a five out of ten.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate
VS
Software Tester at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Top 20
Object Model helps us automate our application testing, but the interface could be made more user-friendly for non-programmers

Pros and Cons

  • "The most valuable feature is the Object Model, where you can directly pull up the object as a global or a local."
  • "It would be improved by adding a drag-and-drop interface to help alleviate the coding."

What is our primary use case?

We use UFT Developer during the application testing process.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable feature is the Object Model, where you can directly pull up the object as a global or a local. It does not require as much scripting.

What needs improvement?

A basic level of programming knowledge is definitely needed to use this solution. It would be improved by adding a drag-and-drop interface to help alleviate the coding. We are investigating solutions where a layperson, with an interest in automation, can begin to work with the tool.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using this solution for one and a half years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

This is a stable solution and it is used perhaps three times per week.

We may increase our usage in the future but it depends on our clients and their requirements. If their operations increase then our usage will as well.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

UFT Developer is easy to scale. I am not sure how many people use this solution in the entire company, although I can say that we have approximately nine people who use it in my group.

How are customer service and technical support?

The technical support has been fine.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We are also working with Selenium, which is an open-source solution. We did not use another tool before these.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is of medium complexity. The deployment took a little longer than we had expected. We had planned for one day and it took a few hours longer than that.

What about the implementation team?

The deployment was done by four to five people from our in-house team. They are mainly IT architects.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

The cost of this solution is a little bit high and we are considering moving to another one.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We are considering moving to Katalon Studio in order to save costs. I am also hoping that it will be easier for people with non-programming backgrounds to use.

What other advice do I have?

This is a good solution and I recommend it. I also recommend using Selenium if people want to use a more web-based application.

Overall, Micro Focus UFT is a good tool, but it is a little bit expensive.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
CM
IT specialist at a tech company with 501-1,000 employees
Real User
Top 5
Good object repository and identification, but they need more integration with different cloud-based tools

Pros and Cons

  • "The most valuable features are the object repository."
  • "In the next release, I would like to see integration with different cloud-based tools such as Azure."

What is our primary use case?

We use this solution with one of the software applications that we have in our company, where we are trying to automate the different scenarios or workflows that we have.

I would also like to see cloud-Ops.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable feature is the object repository. The objects get identified using the tool or where the different properties of the objects are being captured. 

Also, object identification is something that really fascinates me about UFT.

What needs improvement?

As I have only been using this solution for a few weeks, I am really not in a position to say what needs improvement. I need to use it more where I can explore all the available features. If I am not able to perform any operation, then I will be in a position to answer this area of improvement better.

In the next release, I would like to see integration with different cloud-based tools such as Azure. Microsoft already supports the internet. 

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using MicroFocus UFT Developer for a few weeks.

We use version 15.20 or 1A.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It's a stable product.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

This solution is scalable. At this time we have one user in our organization.

We are looking forward to using this solution in the future. We use the trial version and the team is considering the paid version. We have to see how it goes.

How are customer service and technical support?

I have not contacted technical support. I have not needed to, there have been no issues.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

Previously, we explored a few other solutions. One was TesComplete from SmartBear, and the other was Katalon Studio.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup was straightforward. It was easy.

The configuration that I have on the machine is the latest one. I haven't faced any issues. 

It didn't take long to deploy.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

I am not aware of the pricing.

What other advice do I have?

With the experience that I have, I think that it's very good, and I would recommend this solution to others.

Again, with the knowledge that I have in the few weeks that I have been using it, I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PP
Leading SAP Testing Program at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees
Real User
Top 20
Stable and user-friendly for desktop, mobile, and UI-based applications

Pros and Cons

  • "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."
  • "UFT Developer is good, but it requires high-level development skills. Scripting is something that everybody should know to be able to work with this product. Currently, it is very development intensive, and you need to know various scripting languages. It would be good if the development effort could be cut short, and it can be scriptless like Tosca. It will help in more adoption because not every team has people with a software engineering background. If it is scriptless, the analysts who wear multiple hats and come from different backgrounds can also use it in a friendly manner. It is also quite expensive."

What is our primary use case?

We are an IT-based company. We have our own product. I am primarily using Micro Focus UFT Developer for SAP applications such as SAP ECC and SAP HANA.

What is most valuable?

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.

What needs improvement?

UFT Developer is good, but it requires high-level development skills. Scripting is something that everybody should know to be able to work with this product. Currently, it is very development intensive, and you need to know various scripting languages. It would be good if the development effort could be cut short, and it can be scriptless like Tosca. It will help in more adoption because not every team has people with a software engineering background. If it is scriptless, the analysts who wear multiple hats and come from different backgrounds can also use it in a friendly manner.

It is also quite expensive.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using this solution for ten years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It is quite stable.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It is quite scalable. It can be used for multiple applications. It doesn't only cater to SAP applications. It can also be used for UI-based applications and mobile applications.

We have started with five developer licenses, and we are planning to have more licenses in place for more application automation.

How was the initial setup?

It is deployed directly on my desktop. 

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

Its cost is a bit high. From the licensing perspective, I am using a concurrent license. It is not a seed license. It is something that I can use in our network. It can also be used by other users. 

What other advice do I have?

It is a great tool. It is not really rocket science. Once you learn it, you can easily adopt it.

I would rate Micro Focus UFT Developer an eight out of ten.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate
Buyer's Guide
Download our free Micro Focus UFT Developer Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.