Its ease of use and the variety of protocols that it supports are the main reasons why we switched solutions.

We have been using this solution for more than 6.7 years. 

I have used other solutions as well, but I did not get proper support during our testing due to the constraints for testing in particular areas.

We were with HPE and they failed with their new product. It was not compatible with what we already had scripted.

The decision to switch was made in order to create more flexibility within the groups who were using the tools.

We did not use another solution previously. We do use SOAtest and SoapUI in parallel:

• SoapUI is used as freeware by developers for single/simple SOAP requests.
• SOAtest is used by the testing team to build extremely complex scenarios.

We used SoapUI for testing web services. In our case, the advantage of using Parasoft SOAtest is the use of the datasheet; with one message, you can loop through your datasheet and check all your data.

We previously used JMeter and were offered better support from Parasoft. As well as this, the reports and user friendliness of SOAtest helped us make the decision to switch.

Initially, we were using some lightweight open-source (free) tools, but none met with our requirements fully; so we switched solutions.

The project hasn’t used any other solution before this one.

I used to use more open-source tooling. SOATest speeds up our test implementation in the integration context.

No

Not really, QTP was used a little before but was not the right tool for our purposes.

The initial solution available at the clients location was WCFStorm that was completely manual and not very easy to use. When we got a chance to implement the Parasoft toolset, it was pretty obvious that this would make our lives easy.

Previously used SoapUI.

It was our customer’s choice to use SOAtest.