it's a scalable solution,  I would rate it a nine out of ten.

In our organization, we have ten concurrent users who are developers.

I would rate the scalability an eight out of ten. There is room for improvement.

The scalability of Micro Focus UFT Developer is good.

We have three engineers using the solution in my company.

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.

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.

We're limited in our use right now, probably less than 10 people.

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.

It’s designed for scalability. Cloud maps and complex ecosystems, which we’ve got today, even the internet, they’re all made up of nodes. And being able to scale is paramount to evolving those nodes. This solution gives us the ability to scale however we like, which is why we use it. There’s no use having 50,000 nodes that run wild and can’t be controlled, so allowing us to control it is the value of the product.

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.

We bought small, five-license versions of Test Director from Mercury in 2007 and it has continuously grown since then. Today, we have 600 users and 130 active projects. The environment gets bigger and bigger all of the time.

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.

You can scale the product in some ways by integration. You must purchase expensive licenses which they have two kinds: seat licensing and concurrent licenses that can be shared. Each license is expensive, so scaling is expansive.

We don't scale it out on as large of a basis as ALM.

I would rate UFT Developer's scalability an eight out of ten. 

The solution is quite scalable. You can go to thousands of developers because it works on the client-side. UFT itself has limitations, but when you move to UFT Pro, which is now called LeanFT, it is moved to the client-side. Scalability has improved significantly.

We have about 40 developers on the solution currently. We use it extensively as part of continuous testing and we intend to do have 100 people for automation testing. This wasn't possible earlier because it was not at the developer end. 

Since LeanFT gets pushed to the developer, it's on the same IDE, and it always has the developers developing the code. Alongside co-development deal, the same developer also develops the test scripts. We are using it extensively and we intend to achieve 100% coverage for automation testing. 

Scalability was not an issue for the pilot, and it's not expected to be an issue in the future, as all development resources can be used on an as needed basis.

It's very scalable. Given the power that it provides in terms of any programming language and any development platform you can use it on, such as Eclipse or any ID platform. So definitely it's more scalable but still there will be room for improvement in terms of the Mac browsers compatibility/support.

We're already at enterprise scale, so it's used across the enterprise. I would say that we're at that point.

Scalability is not an issue except that you need to create quite a few scripts. It is not easy to just create new test cases for new solutions. When you have to consider other solutions or applications then it's a bit tricky.

The number of people using the UFT application is quite limited, at perhaps three or four. However, there are a couple of hundred people responsible for performing the tests it creates.

Obviously, we are planning to scale in the future because with LeanFT via the service pack, we can do user checking with continuous integration tools, which was initially not possible with the UFT, so we are trying to convert as many scripts from UFT to LeanFT. It will give us the most flexibility with more ways of working with the CPU.

It depends on how you design your solution. If you design a good framework then you can design a scalable solution.

We are at a very early stage in implementing this solution. But at the moment it looks promising. Although, it is difficult to say how far it goes. But at least, so far, we have started.

We have around three and half thousand employees. It is quite scalable. It depends how you do it. You can make automated scripts which do not scale at all. But since it's a developer friendly tool, you have the ability to cut it in the right way to make modules, and then it is very nice to handle it with multiple applications with a lot of test cases.

It's a single run, so that means that you cannot usually use it multiple times in one session.

The scalability is good.

Our projects are generally relatively small and we haven't had any issues scaling to our needs. I'm sure it's scalable in a larger environment. 

When it comes to scalability we never had the opportunity to run UFT in parallel with multiple platforms, so I don't know that the product hits the mark at this point for the type of scalability we would want to test.

Very positive: seems like it’s a lightweight solution that's not going to impact what we were already doing as it's just a "wrapper" on top of what we already do.

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.

It's been extremely scalable as far as the testing that we've done with our customers. They've all been really satisfied with the scalability of the HPE products.

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.

We have just started. We have one person who use it. We have in the future plans to expand it to the whole company.