OpenText UFT One Benefits

Don Ingerson - PeerSpot reviewer
QA Automation Engineer at Global Fortune 500 Company

If your concerns go beyond automating tests to providing evidence that specific tests were executed, what the test pass/fail status was, the user who executed it, the date/time of execution, UFT is top notch at providing test results because it has built in reporting features as well as allowing for customized output files showing exactly where a test step failed along with the timestamp. This is especially important for providing evidence that healthcare, insurance, defense, financial services, and mortgage companies might need, especially to furnish proof to auditors. UFT has at least one distinct advantage over Open Source tools. That is since UFT is an Enterprise tool, you do not have to download anything from the Internet which is good for Security reasons. Most Open Source tools that I am aware of require some form of download from the Internet which results in being less secure.

UFT has improved our organization because when we have regularly occurring releases of an application, we can have any QA team member execute a set of tests (i.e. regression suite) stored in ALM/Quality Center, let the tests run unattended and then examine the results after test completion. We are also able to determine if any of the Web page links are broken by using an instance of MSXML2.XmlHttp. We have a script that does this by retrieving all the links on a page and then reporting the Status for each link. For example, if the Status returned is 404 we know that the link is broken.

View full review »
CT
Test Automaton Architect at Independent Health

UFT One can definitely be a big component for continuous testing across the software lifecycle. We are personally still working on the continuous part of it. For the build to our test environments, we have it nearly all integrated. Unfortunately, on our build servers, we don't only because our build servers don't have touchable code. Think of it like you compiled the website, but you didn't deploy it to Apache, IIS, etc. So, that part we don't have, and that is a limitation on our end. However, we do have the plugins to be able to integrate with ADO or Jenkins, depending on the team, and even if that didn't work, we could send calls off to it. 

Mobile aside, we have a lab of about 35 or 40 virtual machines. I struggle with the number, because on any given day, a virtual machine just craps out on us because some Windows update made it bad, etc., but we have those readily available. They are all profiles using ALM Octane, saying, "These are the machines that have the web browser plugins. These are the machines that have Outlook configured. These are the machines that have desktop app A, B, or C." At any given point, a person or a non-person (like a CI process) could say, "Run these tests and give me the results," and it kind of works pretty nicely.

We are using the AI piece with all our mobile devices. When the AI capabilities that are built into the UFT One, version 15, first came out, I watched the presentation on it. I was there when they launched it at one of their conferences, and it seemed cool, like the whole Alexa thing. I don't know what I would use it for, but it was neat. All of a sudden, I was told, "Hey, you're bringing the mobile app in-house for development and testing." I am like, "that doesn't sound like fun at all." However, I remembered that AI stuff, so I thought, "I am going to try it out and see if it makes my life better." It has been an absolute game changer. 

It took testing mobile applications from being a headache to being fun. It's cool because you are actually working like a real user. For example, you are working with someone who has never really worked with a particular mobile app. You can click on the menu, then click on claims, and now you can see a list of claims. If you want to see just your medical claims or pharmacy claims, click on the filter. If you click on medical, then it should show you that. It is like talking to a human being. There is less code. When changes are made, unless it is a change to the user interface, where there are new features being added or taken away, you don't have to worry about it anymore. 

It is really awesome. For example, if you want to know your available balance at your bank. You go to your bank's app, click on checking and look at the available balance. You don't have to know the names of objects anymore. The objects can change a million times, and all I have to say is, "What is the dollar amount next to the label: 'Available balance'," and using AI, OCR, and all the different computer vision things that are built into the engine, it just works. It just knows about objects. The best part about that for me is those that objects differ from iOS to Android. I don't care anymore because I can write one ubiquitous script that will run on both of those. If the user interface is somewhat similar on the web, I instantly have a test for the web as well.

The multi-device test automation capabilities have allowed us to get to the coverage that we desired faster. We might have had to make a decision of: 

  • Are we going to take twice as long to automate?
  • Are we going to choose iOS or Android? 

Here, we didn't have to make that choice. We just knew that it would work. 

We did do a lot of trial and proof of concept with it. We started to realize that this technology would allow us to instantly have scripts for all the OSs, assuming there was a driver for it. For example, assuming there was a driver available for it and our dev team built it, I could get phone OS coverage for the Mozilla OS and have scripts for it tomorrow. The scripts that I have today would work tomorrow as it comes out. Because it is using the interface, it is using the screens and interacting with them. It doesn't care about the native objects that you have to worry about with traditional automation.

It has helped us, because as we are building scripts we have them all covered. If you want proof, we can run them all. We always do run across a selection. We don't just blindly have faith in it, but we have had it where we build a login script and it works across everything. You build a script to say, "Check a person's deductible balance," and it works across everything. The only time there's any difference whatsoever is if the phone OS has a difference. For example, if somebody wanted to test when you click on the phone number that the dialer opens, that experience is different from iOS to Android. So, that would be a slight deviation. For near everything else, I would say 95 percent or more of our actions - one script covers all devices or platforms right away. Unfortunately, our app is not available right now for iPads or Android tablets. When they decide it is available, other than putting a couple of those into the farm as physical devices, our scripts are ready for it.

View full review »
Paul Grossman - PeerSpot reviewer
Lead QA Engineer at Guaranteed Rate

Our current project features more than a 1000 manual test cases, which took several days and resources to execute. Now, the suite executes in six hours and less than two when run on multiple machines.

With Jenkins connected, or the new cloud-based StormRunner Functional Testing, the tests can be launched anytime, even at the end of day, and be ready for analysis the next morning.

View full review »
Buyer's Guide
OpenText UFT One
March 2024
Learn what your peers think about OpenText UFT One. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: March 2024.
765,386 professionals have used our research since 2012.
VK
Senior Load Performance Consultant at a insurance company with 10,001+ employees

I don't think that OpenText UFT One has really improved it much. Until we move over to a framework where they don't have to spend so much time in creating data-driven scripts that become obsolete once a new version of the application becomes available. It may be doing some things for them, but I think it's probably improved their overall efficiency by maybe 20%. But once they have the framework, I think they will be able to operate this framework 24/seven in unattended mode. And that's when you see 100%, 110% improvement in efficiency. So we're not there yet.

View full review »
RN
Senior Associate at Cognizant

Historically, we have faced a lot of maintenance issues with automation using traditional UFT, because UFT has a mechanism for identifying an object where you have to add object properties. However, if a change happens in the application and your object properties change, then you have to go and update the object properties again, only then can you use those scripts. So, we were using a lot of personnel for script maintenance. Whereas, in UFT One, I like that our maintenance costs have been reduced by a lot because UFT One is using an artificial intelligence feature to identify objects visually.

We use it to do multi-platform testing. 

View full review »
PA
Head of Testing - Warehouse Solutions at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees

Micro Focus UFT One is useful. However, there is an issue with the scripts. We are going to collaborate with multiple automatic specialists to identify the problem. If we can fix the issue, we will continue with UFT, otherwise, we'll switch to other automation tools.

View full review »
TA
Test Automation Consultant at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees

One of the ways the product has improved our organization is that we are able to quickly get detailed information about the behavior of our applications, and we can provide this information to our customers through screenshots and additional information so that they can also easily check the reason for the defect or bug. We can work together without our customers needing special knowledge of programming. This is very important.

UFT allows us to install our applications much more easily, without our customers having to do anything. They don’t even need to click on anything. We can use UFT One to install via scripts. This eases the installation process.

The solution has allowed us to reduce test execution time. If we use it in continuous integration or in headless mode, it improves performance. Between the normal run mode with debugging, and the fast mode in Jenkins, it can reduce it by about 30 percent. That's a lot.

We can run the solution on virtual machines. This greatly affects our ability to control machine configuration and allocate appropriate resources for testing. We wouldn't be able to conduct tests or to carry out work without this solution. This is both very helpful and useful and we consider this a necessity.

View full review »
it_user365925 - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical and Functional Analyst at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees

We use it to automate our integration testing. This lowers our total cost because tests are done automatically rather than manually by people. This saves time. With automatic tests, we can run different types of tests simultaneously. This is the most valuable thing.

View full review »
it_user567828 - PeerSpot reviewer
Software Test Leader with 1,001-5,000 employees

Since I started, we invested in UFT and automation and we have significantly reduced our release cycle time. That has freed up the people who were doing manual regression testing to do more valuable work. The net result is that our cycle time has gone down by a factor of hundreds of percent. And year-on-year, over the three years our error detection rate, by the same people who are now doing good manual testing, has increased by over 300%.

View full review »
it_user357576 - PeerSpot reviewer
Test Automation Engineer at a healthcare company with 501-1,000 employees

Due to cost, my current employer doesn’t use UFT. However, I’ve used it at many different locations in the past. Automation in general will always provide value in test coverage. UFT bridges the coding gap by using VBScript, which is easier for less technical personnel to pick up. This greatly increases the number those people who can use the tool. The competition will require a developer-level skill set to get the same functional benefits.

View full review »
KK
Practice Head - Automation at a computer software company with 10,001+ employees


In some of our recent customer requirements, we have proposed the OpenText UFT One tool. The primary reason behind this is that a customer may have different systems, for e.g., a mainframe system, which is a legacy technology, their current web applications, like AngularJS or ReactJS, could include SAP ERP. In such an ecosystem, UFT One is the right fit to automate end-to-end systems.


View full review »
DR
Automation Test Consultant at a computer software company with 10,001+ employees

The fact that UFT One covers multiple technologies helps in terms of end-to-end scenarios. When we have process flows, workflows, or scenarios that span multiple technologies, we don't have to branch out and use multiple tools. This is very helpful.

The platform supports both API and GUI usage, although we have only used it for GUI.

The continuous testing across the software lifecycle is good. When we have done continuous testing, we connect to remote machines and execute the tool. The only problem that we encountered was that when the system is not visible, or not logged in, then there were some issues. However, it has been several months since we tried this.

We have not really put the AI capabilities into practice yet because it is currently only applicable for web-based applications. Our customers have pre-existing tools that already perform this work.

In general, UFT has helped to reduce our test execution time. In particular, with our non-web ecosystem, the execution time has been reduced considerably.

At this point, UFT has not helped us to decrease defects because we are not creating new test cases. Rather, we are automating test cases with it. It might be the case for regression testing, as regression defects are much higher. 

We also use UFT One for SAP test scenarios.

View full review »
VR
Team Lead at Accenture

This tool integrates well into our environment.

We have the ability to develop automatically for different countries when using continuous deployment. We can use the same scripts, which is a nice feature.

View full review »
it_user360525 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Analyst at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees

We've improved deploying in large environments on the client side. Desktop security has also improved as the feature functionalities of the installed client comes back to the the environment. Because we've improved the deployment, security has then also improved.

View full review »
it_user739557 - PeerSpot reviewer
Director of quality assurance and testing at a insurance company with 1,001-5,000 employees

It helps improve efficiency in regression testing, specifically, and functional testing, in that we automate a lot of repeatable tasks. Not only do we use UFT for automated regression testing, we also use it for doing repeatable tests even for the business, in test environments and in the higher environments as well.

View full review »
it_user377535 - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr. SDET (Framework Architect) at a retailer with 1,001-5,000 employees

Manual execution of tests is always time consuming. With the help of UFT, the test execution time cycle was reduced from weeks to hours. This is essentially a giant leap. UFT framework enables to do easy and quick fixes to tests so that automation suite can still be run in case of changes in application. This feature is essentially very important for agile projects.

View full review »
it_user358305 - PeerSpot reviewer
Testing Coordinator at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees

The process has helped my organization greatly reduce time and cost when it comes to testing a new project. We created automated generic scripts that can test more quickly and efficiently than manually testing.

View full review »
it_user485034 - PeerSpot reviewer
Software QA Lead at a healthcare company with 10,001+ employees

There's a lot of centralized testing from some perspectives and our main goal is to provide for a bunch of different groups at a lower cost so we centralize licensing and distribute it to various people. The biggest benefit of that is that it allows us to empower the people that need the solutions instead of manually having them develop the solutions on their own.

View full review »
AJ
Test Analyst at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees

In our organization, a developer will develop a piece of code and give it to us. We will test it and tell them about any issues or defects. The way we do that is we automate some piece of their code, whatever the core functionality is, and get ready for the next iteration. That means that when the sprint goes from Sprint 1 to Sprint 2, we make sure that Sprint 1 is not impacted because of new code deployment. The way we have benefited from UFT is that we are not using manual regression testing. Whatever code we have developed will be enhanced in Sprint 2 , and we keep that piece ready for Sprint 3 regression. Therefore, over a period of time, we will have the flow ready, and we don't have to do manual testing from scratch for every release.

Previously, we were doing manual testing for each sprint, and when we got to an advanced sprint, like Sprint 4 or 5, we would have to stop and test that entire functionality again. UFT has helped us a lot in reducing the manual effort and in passing the savings along to our client. Regression efforts have been reduced by at least 20 percent, if not more.

Initially, we were using UFT 12 or 12.53 and then we started slowly increasing by installing the patches and moving to the next versions. When compared with UFT and manual execution, we have definitely saved a lot of effort, somewhere in the range of 60 to 70 percent when compared with our efforts to manually test. A script which takes around half an hour to execute in automation takes around 3.5 hours for manual execution, along with documentation because we execute things in a way that it creates the documentation as well.

View full review »
it_user739548 - PeerSpot reviewer
Qa engineer

It's definitely cut down on a lot of time by using this application. We have about ten environments; ten times in every environment manually would've taken most of the day, rather than doing it simultaneously. It saves me hours.

View full review »
it_user357477 - PeerSpot reviewer
Principal Consultant | Contractor Manager at a insurance company with 10,001+ employees

It's improved the way our organization functions by automating test cases that were previously done manually. It also improved the robustness and execution time of these test cases.

View full review »
it_user482850 - PeerSpot reviewer
Enterprise DevOps Leader, Program Manager at a media company with 1,001-5,000 employees

A key benefit, obviously, is in terms of effort savings that we have achieved using UFT. We have used it for different projects across different business units within the enterprise. That's really the key for UFT.

View full review »
NK
Lead Analyst at a computer software company with 10,001+ employees

UFT One has helped us to reduce testing timelines. Earlier, during our manual testing days, it would take 15 days to certify a release, but with UFT One and automation, we are able to achieve that within five days. That's how important it is. It also improves the quality of our testing.

We have also seen an improvement in test coverage, going from 80 percent to over 90 percent.

In addition, it helps in identifying defects earlier. With manual testing, that 15-day timeline meant there were times when we would find defects on the 11th or 12th day of the cycle, but with automation we are able to run the complete suite within a day and we are able to find the failures. It helps us to provide early feedback.

View full review »
it_user364419 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior QA Engineer with 1,001-5,000 employees

As with any test automation tool, the ability to run repeatable tests unattended during off hours saves lots of manual testing hours.

View full review »
it_user636204 - PeerSpot reviewer
Performance Engineer at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees

We use it mainly for regression and it's very useful for that. We reduce a lot of stats around cost savings in the regression packs that we run.

View full review »
JB
Lead Software Test Engineer at Excellus Solutions

UFT has improved our ability to regression test. This frees up the test team to work on only the new portions of the software without having to worry that we are introducing new errors in other areas without knowing it.

View full review »
it_user347685 - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr. QA Engineer at a retailer with 501-1,000 employees

I was able to reduce regression and functional test times by 80%.

View full review »
it_user347646 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Technical Engineer with 1,001-5,000 employees

We do consulting, training and mentoring with the HP tool set, including UFT, so it is kind of our bread and butter. There are a lot of options with the tool. We just finished implementing an automation framework with over 600 tests using UFT.

Last week, I mentored another customer in how to use the tool with their team so they can start automating their tests.

We use it in a lot of different ways. I used it to build a script that automatically checks me in if I have a flight with Southwest to help me get a better boarding group, so it helps with my travel too.

The product is so robust by itself, testing both GUI and backend processes in conjunction with other tools like Loadrunner and ALM. The UFT tool can be such a huge boon to a testing organization that can commit to its use. Over time there is so much testing that can be taken off of the manual testers hands, allowing them to focus on the more complex testing issues.

View full review »
it_user357483 - PeerSpot reviewer
QTP Analyst (Test Automation Engineer) at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
  • It saves time and manpower. Test development and maintenance are faster and easier thanks to UFT. 
  • Also, one tool covers several projects developed in different technologies while the approach to test design can remain the same. A relatively small team of trained professionals can cover a wide range of tests. 
  • Due to UFT’s popup messages for errors and test execution results viewer, it is very simple to analyze the test results and figure out what went wrong, reducing the time needed for defect detection and test updates.
View full review »
it_user348159 - PeerSpot reviewer
Consultant I at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees

With HP UFT, we're able to synchronize with HP Quality Center, and API automation tests can be placed into test suites and run automatically through the HP Quality Center scheduler. Results for the tests are set and HP Quality Center is able to report on the test results. Emails can then be sent to notify anyone of the results in real time.

View full review »
it_user809085 - PeerSpot reviewer
AST at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees

We have used it for the web and Windows-based applications. It is very productive in terms of execution.

View full review »
it_user567963 - PeerSpot reviewer
Manager at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees

The regression tests run must faster than if you do it manually. It's assured that the tests are always done the same way. If you run these tests manually, the click behavior might be different or there may be errors during the test. These issues are excluded when you automate it. This tool keeps it consistent.

Another benefit is that these tests can be triggered directly from ALM. In ALM, we have test plans and then we execute the tests. That's pretty cool.

View full review »
it_user378180 - PeerSpot reviewer
SAP Consultant at KCA Deutag

We are a worldwide organization with a complex financial authorization matrix. When changes were made to this matrix, we provided automated test scripts. More than 20,000 tests were executed in 1 week.

View full review »
it_user468276 - PeerSpot reviewer
QA Technical Lead at a consumer goods company with 1,001-5,000 employees

Its ease of use means we've been able to ramp up non-technical users and have them understand how to do general debugging very easily.

View full review »
it_user345183 - PeerSpot reviewer
Managing Director at a tech services company with 51-200 employees

It works with both desktop and web-based applications.

It also provides us with service testing, API testing, GUI testing and business process testing.

View full review »
it_user568068 - PeerSpot reviewer
Application Delivery CTO – Group Operations and QA at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees

We can move beyond manual testing without having to go through a whole transformation of an application.

View full review »
it_user347655 - PeerSpot reviewer
Assistant System Engineer at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees

We have performed 3500 test case automations, and we are able to execute them in just five days. If we were to do this manually, it would take 30 days.

View full review »
it_user343329 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Product Development Engineer with 5,001-10,000 employees

This product has increased productivity and quality of testing. It has also reduced manual efforts for performing Regression and Sanity for every new build.

There is also better evaluation and analysis of defects using UFT integrated with ALM.

View full review »
it_user366027 - PeerSpot reviewer
Test Automation Specialist at a retailer with 1,001-5,000 employees

It allows us to automate hundreds of test cases that would normally have to be manually tested. The tests are also extremely reliable so it saves a lot of time on analysis. That's really the first and foremost benefit for us. We were doing quarterly releases as well as maintenance releases, which is quite a lot. So this solution has saved us a lot of effort and expense.

View full review »
it_user671361 - PeerSpot reviewer
Test consultant at a tech services company with 51-200 employees

For test automation, it helps to speed up the testing and to speed up the software delivery, especially for HPE UFT because you have lots of test automation tools. Also, if I compare HPE UFT with the HPE QTP solution, then HPE UFT is more user-friendly in its use. You still have to program it, but you don't have to program it all of the time; so for a user who isn't used to working with code, he can do other things in HPE UFT.

View full review »
it_user347658 - PeerSpot reviewer
Analyst Programmer at a university with 1,001-5,000 employees

We can use HP UFT not only in testing for each product update(s), but also to improve the productivity for some repeatable routine tasks.

View full review »
it_user341058 - PeerSpot reviewer
Software Test Engineer at a tech vendor with 51-200 employees

I worked for Weight Watchers on a diabetes product which had three main modules -- signup, questionnaire, and calendar.

The manual resource was created for eight users for full processing, but after I generated the script, I did the full process for the same test cases for up to 100 users.

View full review »
it_user176970 - PeerSpot reviewer
Test Automation Engineer at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees
  1. Improved our ability to work in different environments and test in different browsers
  2. Ability to calculate the test run and results using ALM
  3. Easy to maintain the requirements and completion of its development and testing process
  4. Improved the level of coding to a higher level
View full review »
it_user166281 - PeerSpot reviewer
Test Automation Specialist with 1,001-5,000 employees

We’re already using LoadRunner and ALM. UFT gets along well with these other solutions, blending together with the ALM suite.

View full review »
it_user363267 - PeerSpot reviewer
Test Manager at a energy/utilities company with 1,001-5,000 employees

UFT is the only technology that enabled us to actually automate our core application.

View full review »
it_user461790 - PeerSpot reviewer
Consultant at a tech consulting company with 51-200 employees

It has reduced time-to-market regression from 160+ hours to 12 hours.

View full review »
it_user347037 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Automation QA Engineer at a tech vendor with 501-1,000 employees

UFT is easy to use so the QA team is not required to have much programming skills. VBScript language is also an advantage that it has.

View full review »
it_user346101 - PeerSpot reviewer
Principal Consultant with 51-200 employees

It's allowed business analysts to work with automation scripts without requiring them to have programming knowledge.

View full review »
it_user251862 - PeerSpot reviewer
Automation Engineer at HealthNow

There's less manual testing time, so we are able to quickly resolve any IT issues.

View full review »
reviewer789918 - PeerSpot reviewer
Consultant

With frequent releases, using automation to perform regression testing can save us huge amount of time and resources. It has allowed us to focus on newly added features.

View full review »
EZ
Test Solution Architect at a tech services company with 51-200 employees

I don't really see a way it has improved our organization. I don't like this tool and I don't think that it's a successful example for automation. It's because of the tool's limitations that make the automation of a project difficult to execute successfully.

View full review »
it_user443127 - PeerSpot reviewer
Project Manager at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees

My previous organization used UFT extensively for automation more than 500 complex end to end regression tests with considerable savings in time and effort. We were able to achieve that with high degree of reusability.

View full review »
it_user379695 - PeerSpot reviewer
Engineer at a tech vendor with 51-200 employees

We've used it just during a Proof of Concept period.

View full review »
it_user341283 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Software Quality Assurance Engineer at a tech vendor with 501-1,000 employees

It allowed us to provide automation test coverage in various areas of an online web application, including web services..

View full review »
FP
Senior Digital Business Consultant at HNRG

The approach to the automation test makes the test activities more interesting and improves the software quality.

View full review »
Buyer's Guide
OpenText UFT One
March 2024
Learn what your peers think about OpenText UFT One. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: March 2024.
765,386 professionals have used our research since 2012.