OpenText UFT One Reviews

The features I've found most valuable are--

• API
• GUI

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.

Cross-browser testing feature should be improved.

They should also develop a generic framework so everyone can use it who purchases it.

Also, the browser shrinks while running GUI test cases, and UFT hangs while debugging.

I've been using it for a year.

HP UFT consumes too much RAM, so the system gets hung.

It's 90%.

Initially, we started doing automation using Selenium, but we could not succeed with it, so we migrated from Selenium to HP UFT. We now have a successful solution.

We faced a lot of problems during implementations, such as objection identification and cross-browser functionalities.

We implemented with our in-house team.

The ROI is good.

The cost of the HP UFT license is more.

The GUI automation, mobile testing, UFT, and the application lifecycle management features are the most valuable for my projects.

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.

I would like to see them remove the shortcoming of working with .NET applications, as there is not much support provided for automating applications developed on .NET.

I would also like to see HP increase the trial period for UFT so that people can learn it by giving them more time. They can then practice more and more to increase their knowledge.

Finally, by providing mobile add-in and an API testing add-in to the trial version, they can help people to grow in this field in a better way.

I have used this for more than five years.

I have faced some issues while running automation scripts. Sometimes loop variable named as “i” do not actually perform its functionality. By changing the variable name the purpose is resolved. The stability of test scripts running is not very good when we change the names of actions.

9/10 - the team provides solutions as soon as possible through email.

9/10 - the team provides solutions as soon as possible through email.

I was using Selenium with Java to do automation, but as Selenium could not help me do Windows based application automation, I switched to UFT as a new solution.

The initial step for me was straightforward as I have good technical skills. Therefore, it was easy for me to learn VB scripting and start preparing frameworks for UFT.

I was working in a service-based company as an automation developer. I have implemented all types of frameworks in the banking sector on which I was working.

The return on investment for any company buying this product license is 100 percent, as businesses with clients increase productivity when manual tasks becomes faster and efficient by automating them with this tool.

Once the license is purchased, this tool can be used for automating many applications, and can be used by any automation developer working in an organization that has purchased this licensed tool.

This product can be used for automation of websites, windows application, mobile testing and API (Application Programming Interface) test automation.

People who wanted to reduce their efforts for repetitive task can use this product to automate manual tests. This helps increase the reliability and quality of testing.

It's great to be able to go from one company to another and each one uses UFT similarly. It's also extremely versatile, in that you can pretty much use it with any type of application.

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.

The knowledge base for getting started isn't terribly deep, so it requires you to have a bit of programming ability to pick it up and use it.

It's deployed without any issues for us.

It's fairly stable, but the problem is that it's not always updated and current. When something new comes up, it takes HP a long time to support it.

Scalability depends on the user. UFT is basically a sandbox and will be as flexible as you make it. So scalability can be high, but there are things that work against it. You're bound by the licensing structure, so in order to get bigger benefits, you have to have multiple copies. If you want to fun multiple simultaneous tests, you have to have the licensing to do that, and that costs a ton of money.

A lot of people are moving away from the big intertools. So people look at products all the time, and every time the budget comes up or every time they tell me to cut expenses or every time they get frustrated with it, a lot of the small-time tools and open-source tools get attention. So I've been evaluating those.

If you're an HP shop, you're probably going to go out and buy it. But I don't think new customers will sign on to replace, for example, Selenium. There are plenty of open-source options, and people who know how to implement UFT already know how to implement open-source codes. So I think that people who are using open source will stick with open source, and people who have significant investment inHP will stick with HP.

For HPE UFT, you can automate your testing for a lot of different platforms. It's not only web-based but also for backend applications; you can also do the integration of the applications.

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.

I'm really looking forward to seeing the HPE StormRunner Functional. If it's possible to do it in a good way from the cloud, and you don't have to install it. I've seen that working for the HR manager and ALM solutions, so it would be very helpful. You have to deal with issues such as the firewall and how can the tool talk with the application, i.e., if the application is on a company network and so on. That, of course, is important to figure out.

I have used HPE Unified Functional Testing (UFT) for one and a half years, whereas the HPE QuickTest Professional (QTP) for a couple more years before that.

We have to download it, then install it on our own machines and the machines sometimes aren't stable; since we have PDIs, also the UFT isn't stable and I don't know yet where the connection is.

Scalability is a little difficult because you need to have the machines and then, have to install it. It is less scalable than the other products. For example, the HR manager just takes another workspace in the cloud and then, you work.

I'm more happy with the SaaS support for the HR manager and ALM than with the off-premises support, that I have to so through for UFT. This is because, often, when I have an issue with UFT, I get slow responses and most of the times, it is in regards to the things that I have already Googled and tried to figure out myself. So, it doesn't always help me.

HPE UFT is quite complex to set up.

I, myself mostly, have experience with the HPE tooling and I haven't been in the position where I could decide what tooling to choose. I'm hired because I have this knowledge but I would say usability of the tools, (i.e., how you can use it) is the most important criteria while selecting a vendor

It's allowed us to perform functional testing (to verify a specific action or function of code) for each product update.

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.

We would like to see smart identification (captures a unique object during testing) work more reliably.

I've used it for two years.

Our initial deployment was complex and there was a Java conflict we had to resolve.

We've had no issues with stability.

We've had no scalability issues.

We don't use HP technical support.

The setup was complex as we were required to have Windows updated. Also, there was apparently a Java conflict that had to be resolved first.

I used almost all the features. To me, the the most valuable features were the OR and code compiler (VB script) to call the framework.

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.

• Spy elements
• OR

I used it from February to December 2014.

No issues encountered.

When I ran the script for two or three times sequentially, the tool hung and wouldn’t respond.

There were issues with browsers when supporting more elements such as CSS and HTML.

8/10 - because they have good technical knowledge and the response is really fast.

I connected with technical support only a few times, so it is not fair for me to rate them. But for the few times I did, it is 8/10.

I did, and I switched because the newer tools have many features and many options such as browser support, responsive design, and is faster. However, there are free and open source tools.

It was straightforward.

It was done through a vendor team who were mid-level in experience.

The license is expensive.

I came to the company and they were using the tool, but there were other options for them choose to choose from such as Selenium and Node.js.

You need to improve the support browsers and responsive design, and try to use newer and better languages (JS).

Also, check the stability of your product(s) when you run a lot of scripts.

They should reduce the price.

1. UFT12 supports IE11, Firefox until v24 and Chrome browser until v30, operating systems and environments
2. When the test contains any unmapped repository parameter, the Errors pane displays the test name and path in the Item column
3. UFT12 fully supports the .xlsx format of Excel files for importing data to the Data Table or when specifying an Excel file for use with ALM configurations
4. The InsightObject.Click method brings the Insight object’s parent test object into focus before performing the click. In some cases, this change of focus may hide your Insight object in the application, making it impossible for UFT to find and click it. In those cases, you can use the new InsightObject.ClickSpecial method, which does not bring the parent test object into focus before clicking
5. When using Insight to recognize objects, UFT searches for objects on your screen that match a stored test object image. When modifying a test object’s image, you can now specify areas within the image that UFT ignores when searching for a match. This is useful if parts of an object do not always look the same. For example, if different icons are used on different operating systems to run a certain application
6. Standard VBScript provides the CreateObject function, which enables creating 32-bit COM object references. UFT has added theCreateObject64 statement, enabling you to create 64-bit COM object references
7. The popular Save with Resources feature from QuickTest is now also available for GUI Tests in UFT. It comes in handy if you need to open or run a test when you do not have access to a network drive or ALM. For example, you may need to create a portable copy of a test for use when traveling to other sites. Using the File > Save (Other) > Save with Resources command, you can save everything you need to a local drive or to another storage device. When you use this option, UFT creates a copy of the test, its resource, and any external actions called by your test, and adjust the references from your test to the resources and external actions so that you can use them locally
8. The UFT Web Add-in now supports the following additional objects for HTML5 object recognition:
   
   • WebAudio. Supports recognition of HTML audio objects
   • WebVideo. Supports recognition of HTML5 video objects
   • WebNumber. Supports recognition of HTML5 number objects. These objects may look like numeric edit boxes or up-down spin controls, depending on the browser
   • WebRange. Supports recognition of HTML5 range objects
9. In previous versions of UFT, if you wanted to test Flex applications, you needed to first compile them specifically for testing. UFT12 includes the UFT Flex Runtime Loader, which you can use to open most of your Flex applications for testing, without having to pre-compile the application. You can use the new Flex tab in the Record and Run Settings dialog box to instruct UFT to open Flex applications at the beginning of a record or run session. In this tab, you specify whether you have prepared the application in advance for testing, or whether UFT should open the application using the Runtime Loader. You can also configure the new Flex Record and Run settings using an automation script
10. You can define a shortcut key or key combination that stops the current recording session (for GUI tests only) or run operation, even if UFT is not in focus or is in hidden mode. In the Run Sessionspane in the Options dialog box (Tools > Options > General pane > Run Sessions node, click in the Stop command shortcut key field and then press the required key or key combination on the keyboard. The default key combination is CTRL+ALT+F5.
11. The Run Results Deletion tool is now incorporated into the Run Results Viewer. This enables you to automatically delete test results from tests and business process tests stored on ALM without needing to independently connect the Run Results Deletion tool to ALM.
12. Testing Extensibility now supports Visual Studio 2010 and Visual Studio 2012. When you run a test that uses a virtualized service, you can now view the service’s details in the run results:
    • The name of the service and location of the deployed service
    • Deployment status of the service
    • The performance and data models used in this test run-time agent mode
    • The data simulation and performance simulation accuracy for the virtualized service in this test run.
13. A new RunDebug method is available in the Automation Object Model. This method instructs UFT to stop at breakpoints when running a test using automation, whether from ALM or in an automation run.
14. Using UFT, you can now run GUI tests as well as API tests that use a virtualized service. This enables you to run tests of your application using a service that would otherwise be inaccessible for test runs.
15. UFT provides Business Process Testing from within UFT, using the native UFT user interface. This enables users to create, maintain, debug, and run BPT tests together with GUI and API tests, providing a single, one-stop-shop product for seamless functional testing.
    • Business process tests and flows are comprised of business components, which can be used to test specific parts of your application modularity. Business components include keyword GUI components, scripted GUI components, and API components
    • If you are familiar with using BPT in ALM, you can use BPT in UFT as follows:
      • Add components and flows to your tests and flows by dragging them from the Toolbox pane to the test or flow opened in the document pane
      • Set parameter promotion options in the BPT Testing tab of the Options dialog box
      • Link and promote parameters in the Component Parameters tab of the Properties pane. Use the other Properties pane tabs to view and modify various test, flow, component, or group details, such as descriptions, fields, and comments
      • Manage component iterations in the Data pane

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

With my experience, I couldn’t find any need for improvement.

I was using the QTP tool for five years and UFT for three months.

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered.

I didn’t get a chance to work with customer service.

I didn’t get a chance to work with technical support.

No previous solution was used.

The initial setup was straightforward.

Implementation was done through a vendor team, and their level of expertise is 9/10.

This tool is good for programming experts.