OpenText UFT Developer Other Solutions Considered

it_user468147 - PeerSpot reviewer
Software Quality Assurance Supervisor at a consumer goods company with 10,001+ employees

Being frank, the number one reason is it works off our existing UFT licenses. So we already have those procured and existing, so that's an easy transition for us from a cost perspective.

View full review »
DS
Team Leader at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees

We are planning to use SAPS/4HANA for migration testing and to have more licenses for more testers.

View full review »
JW
Director Testing & Quality Assurance at WBF international vice President

Tools like this only existed within companies, but now with the advent of HP’s product, we’ve been able to see a solution that can address problems that arise in the workplace. The open innovation is now able to be integrated, and we hadn't see a solution that was open previously.

View full review »
Buyer's Guide
Functional Testing Tools
March 2024
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText, SeleniumHQ, Tricentis and others in Functional Testing Tools. Updated: March 2024.
765,234 professionals have used our research since 2012.
AS
Programator at a computer software company with 10,001+ employees

I did evaluate other options in the interest of changing solutions.

I tried UFT Testpack, which is a library for testing but it isn't very scalable. I also tried Atrium from Selenium, but it only works on Windows 10 and it is unable to automate Java Swing applications. There is a software application from SmarteSoft that is written in Java, but I didn't find a tool that was capable of automating this application.

View full review »
OM
Research & Development Engineer at a insurance company with 201-500 employees

Because we need to properly support people in banking and follow regulations, we use UFT. It is really more of a political decision than a proper choice as to the products we would prefer to use.

We had Selenium first because it runs on Java — which is a stable language — we could use it and adapt it for all we needed to do. As a developer in Java with 10 years of experience, I could resolve our problem myself and not need any help. If I have a problem, I check the internet, I go to stackoverflow.com or visit one of the many forums for Java. So I guess my problem is that with Selenium I can check the problem, fix it myself, and I can do it right away without having to wait for a response from support. 

A second benefit to Selenium is that it is open-source. It's not a costly choice. We have the opportunity to install in whatever platform we want, and that is good for us — It could be Unix, Windows — It doesn't matter. It is good as a more flexible solution. 

Third, we use the platform for continuous integration. We have Dockers which we use for all containers and helps us prepare all our environments in simple ways. It's very easy to use, very easy to deploy, it's very easy to install and very easy to understand. The framework we use with Selenium is something we can use for all the functional testing for insurance products. Selenium would be what I would use for banking if it were possible.

View full review »
it_user313965 - PeerSpot reviewer
Consultant with 10,001+ employees

All options in the test automation market are evaluated at all times. Rational Robot, Tosca, Soap UI, etc.

View full review »
it_user482850 - PeerSpot reviewer
Enterprise DevOps Leader, Program Manager at a media company with 1,001-5,000 employees

We didn't actually choose it. Our customers provide LeanFT, so we started using it.

View full review »
it_user128247 - PeerSpot reviewer
Sales at a comms service provider with 10,001+ employees

Our development teams are using a lot of open source solutions, and other tools like JIRA. But for our business needs and purposes, we have seen that HPE solutions are still valid for our business. We need to have backwards traceability. We have to have the capability to show what has been done, what's been going on, and what. In some of the cases, there has been the discussions that, "Yes. We have all this information, but you have to go to the Jenkins, or this and that logs, and it's there." But that's not what the business wants to see. They want to have a high-level visibility on their business. That is why we are still keeping the HPE products, and probably also in the future we'll have them.

View full review »
it_user671328 - PeerSpot reviewer
Test Automation Engineer at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees

Compared to IBM Selenium, LeanFT or UFT Pro is more stable. They have better object recognition functionalities and more support technologies. Maybe they have a bit less browser support than Selenium, but that's okay.

Compared to any of the competitors that I’ve looked at, the HPE tool is a bit smaller. So, it makes it more fun to use it because you don't have such a large application as the Rational test suite or the Functional Tester. And I think it was more stable. So, even at the beginning, we had fewer problems than with Functional Tester and object recognition. But, I think both tools are not bad.

The major advantage of LeanFT or UFT Pro is that it is easier to integrate it into ALM. So, with Functional Test we always had these space scripts in ALM, and then we had to call Functional Tester somehow and bring the results back to ALM. It's easier with LeanFT.

View full review »
it_user253326 - PeerSpot reviewer
Test Automation Architect at a healthcare company with 1,001-5,000 employees
VS
Software Tester at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees

We are considering moving to Katalon Studio in order to save costs. I am also hoping that it will be easier for people with non-programming backgrounds to use.

View full review »
Buyer's Guide
Functional Testing Tools
March 2024
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText, SeleniumHQ, Tricentis and others in Functional Testing Tools. Updated: March 2024.
765,234 professionals have used our research since 2012.