We used Test Project. There were several reasons for switching to Ranorex. 

Firstly, we were concerned about data security as our previous solution sent data to the internet. 

Secondly, it lacked support for Windows-based application automation. 

Thirdly, making changes was complex, especially creating custom keywords. For example, if as a developer, I might want to create a keyword. If they had different formats, it would be quite a cumbersome process to add a custom keyword.

Lastly, the tool was discontinued, and the paid version wasn't appealing.

Previously, we used a different solution called iMacros. It's very basic compared to what I'm doing right now with Ranorex Studio.

It was half the price, but harder to use. 

Overall, it wasn't the best solution for us.

My customer did not use any other solutions before.

I have used TestComplete and iMacros prior to Ranorex Studio. They're not selling them anymore. Additionally, we tested Katalon Studio but it did not work for us. We found that Ranorex Studio was a more professional solution.

TestComplete is similar to Ranorex Studio, there are some advantages and some disadvantages. However, it is more expensive than Ranorex Studio. iMacros and Katalon Studio are not good.

I have been working with Micro Focus UFT One for ten years.

UFT is much more expensive, which is why were started using Ranorex Studio.

Over the last 18 years I’ve used many products ranging from Rational Robot, Winrunner, Test Complete and QTP to now using Ranorex and lately Selenium. I’ve also “played around” with other tools such as WATIR, RFT, SilkTest and lately cucumber etc but I ultimately chose Ranorex because of its price point, hence ROI. It was a fraction of the cost of other commercial tools, yet had the features we needed and was quick to get up and running.

It had a “modern” IDE that was user friendly, I could develop in Visual Studio and it was in a powerful language that most of my team was familiar with.

Our company has recently made a decision to use Selenium also. This was purely based on its cost however. Whilst Selenium these days has become a powerful automation alternative, it is still really limited to people with previous automation experience and with a strong programming background if you wish to achieve similar ROI compared with the commercial tools. For us this is now the case, hence the move.

Selenium however lacks the inbuilt IDE and tools that the commercial solutions have and is still essentially a group of libraries. It does have a strong user base however, hence lots of examples are available in Java. If you don’t have a programming background it can be time consuming to come to grips with however. Selenium really requires a framework to utilise it efficiently, so if you don’t already have one you’ll either have to learn and use an existing framework or build one which will be time consuming. You also need to hook into other tools such as TestNG or similar to get consistent reporting approach (these days UI testing is but a small part of a bigger picture; Unit, Web Service, UI testing etc). As such the tool which started off sounding good because it was free is now incurring significant cost as a result of the lack of inbuilt tools to get you up and running quickly, and the skills learning curve.

I think skilled users loose sight of how much they’ve learned over the years, so whilst Selenium is great and easy to pick up if you’ve already got a strong development background, it’s not a good choice for teams that lack those skills. The commercial tools allow users to walk before they can run so to speak.

Ranorex still has the best pricing point for bang for buck I believe with the runner license availability being a big selling point. When we shifted from QTP to Ranorex six years ago we did so because we were able to purchase 39 Ranorex licenses with the budget we had for the maintenance of our four QTP licenses, and the tool worked on our technologies whereas QTP didn’t anymore. It was a simple decision to move.

We used Rational Robot and Coded UI in the past and still use them to a certain extent, though they are becoming obsolete. Ranorex is more up-to-date and provides more support for testing.

We have in fact had several failed attempts at automation with our product and have been evaluating tools all along. The reason we ultimately settled on Ranorex was a combination of its current state and our being able to overcome problems as the occurred.

Selenium was in use before Ranorex. Ranorex have a great starter's guide for people that have never done automation. Selenium problems will lead to huge stack traces and unclear errors, while Ranorex stripped out a lot out of basic Visual Studio, so the majority of errors are pretty easy to describe and fix.

Katalon studio, we changed on support issues, when it became free

Yes, but Ranorex provides good support for all kinds of solutions like desktop, web applications or mobile Applications. It was an all in one package for us.

yes, previously I was using an automation tool (build on VB .NET) which did not have capability for automating flash/ Silverlight/ windows applications.

From the beginning of the project, Ranorex was used as solution for test automation.

When we started evaluating Ranorex, we were already using a number of other products for the various platforms we run automaiton against. Unfortunately, none of the products we were using at the time had the capability to automate Windows 8 apps. Ranorex's ability to do this (the only product we found at the time that could) is the reason we chose the product.

This is the only product I've used in my current role.

I tried to use different products Selenium, TestComplete, amongst others, but this was very familiar, fast, adaptable and flexible.

Ranorex was able to read some of our custom components, while other tools failed to do that. Also, it was within our budget.

I've seen and used many different test automation solutions like HpP QTP. Not only is Ranorex's solution one of the most powerful and easy to use, it has one of the lowest cost entry points resulting in a quicker ROI.

Also, their end user support and communication has been second to none. C# language support is an added advantage of that.

I had experience on QTP and RFT. They do not support the latest version of browsers or mobile environments. Their costs are high, accordingly.

No previous solution was used.

We tried QTP many years ago, which was good but expensive. Also, Selenium is limited to browser and mobile, and does not support desktop app.

We knew we needed a new solution because testing was only executed manually. A better approach for the team was to automate testing to reduce costs.

When selecting a vendor, the most important criteria are support, providing a trial version for testing the tool, and the functionality the tool offers.

We switched because the older solution did not support Chrome.