We work with Accenture, Cognizant and Tara. They are our global service providers. We did an RFP, but Accenture only put Tosca on the table. They didn't give us any other options for scriptless.

We went online, went to some conferences, and talked to people who are using Tosca. We did industry-review research and the like that. But in the end, we were able to prove out Tosca and that's the reason we went with it.

We have evaluated the Copado Robotic tool.

We did look at other options before choosing Tosca, however, I cannot recall which. It was a few years ago now. We did use Gartner to help narrow down our options. 

We evaluated SmartBear, HPE QTP (now UFT), QuerySurge, and Alteryx.

It was very apparent that Tosca was an all-in-one solution. We could do database testing, UI, and API testing. The others focus on one area. HPE and SmartBear focus on things such as UI/UX interface-type testing, while Alteryx and QuerySurge focus on backend database testing. Tricentis encompasses all that and that's why we selected them.

We explored tools such as HPE QTP/UFT, Selenium, Ranorex and TestComplete but these tools require some specific programming skills to start. Tricentis Tosca doesn’t require any programming skills and it’s a codeless automation.

Before choosing, I evaluated QTP and Selenium, along with Tosca Testsuite.

I have evaluated other tools.

We did evaluate other options for stepping over to another testtool because of the current pricing and the poor support.

I evaluated other solutions including both Selenium and QTP.

I was not involved in the decision-making process.

I did do a proper comparative analysis of other solutions with regards to pricing. 

We evaluated HPE's QC and our existing tools.

We evaluated Micro Focus, TestComplete, and Katalon Studio.

I evaluated the freeware tools.

HP UFT (ALM), Qualify by Original Software, TestComplete by SmartBear

Yes, evaluated TestComplete, HP UFT ALM, Selenium / SpecFlow / Cucumber.

Yes, there was an analysis, but I was not part of the company at that time.

There was no need for us to do so.

We also looked at Worksoft.

TOSCA was recommended, so we didn’t look into anything else. Our software provider said it could support their solution so we went for it. We had looked into HP UFT and Smartbear. We had used HP UFT but are fading away from them.

Before choosing, we evaluated QTP, Selenium, and so on.

The department did an evaluation between HP Quality Center and TOSCA before my assignment started. The main reasons for choosing Tosca Testsuite was its easier usability as well as lower costs.

We looked at Ranorex and Eggplant. We decided to go with Testsuite because you can integrate manual test cases and you can see the reports in a nice way and see how the test case is going in the requirement section.

We were advised to use QTP, but because we are new to programming, Tosca was the best for us to adopt.

No, I was not involved in the choosing of this solution.

We evaluated SmartBear.

Whilst selecting a vendor, we look for factors such as technical support and maintenance.

We evaluated several other options which included all the most popular automated testing tools.

AutoIt.

Yes. Selenium WebDriver and QTP.

We also evaluated HPE, IBM Rational Functional Tester, and Ranorex. However, for us, Tosca was the perfect choice.

We did Proof of Concept with other automation tools, such as UFT and TestPartner, but we found Tosca to be a better tool.

I have evaluated other solutions.

We evaluated other options before choosing this solution.