As per my working experience over the last three and half years with RIT/RTVS, I would consider the two following areas of improvement: * Reporting: In the recent release of RCPT, the "Usage graph" feature is included, but that still needs improvements in terms of UI and timeline filtering criteria. * Implementing custom functions is a bit of a tedious job, as ECMAscript does not support some of the standard JavaScript functions. Also, the Script editor window is not user-friendly .
Architect: Service Virtualization, DevOps and Automation at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
2017-05-16T20:07:00Z
May 16, 2017
One of the biggest disappointments for me and my team was dependency on various patches, or so call clients for every single technology. You have to download and install clients for HTTP/ MQ/ JMS or any other type of protocol. Ideally, the tool should come as a complete package having support for all technologies and protocols. User friendliness: I would rate it somewhere around 5/10 in terms of user-friendliness. It can be simpler to build stubs and middle-ware based test cases compared to the solution given by RTVS.
When evaluating Service Virtualization tools, PeerSpot users explain that it is important to understand your specific needs as well as the capabilities of the various tools. Users note that earlier defect identification as well as the ability to spin up virtual services without purchasing additional hardware are valuable features of these tools. Buyers should also take into consideration the types of licenses available, associated costs and integration with other products.
As per my working experience over the last three and half years with RIT/RTVS, I would consider the two following areas of improvement: * Reporting: In the recent release of RCPT, the "Usage graph" feature is included, but that still needs improvements in terms of UI and timeline filtering criteria. * Implementing custom functions is a bit of a tedious job, as ECMAscript does not support some of the standard JavaScript functions. Also, the Script editor window is not user-friendly .
One of the biggest disappointments for me and my team was dependency on various patches, or so call clients for every single technology. You have to download and install clients for HTTP/ MQ/ JMS or any other type of protocol. Ideally, the tool should come as a complete package having support for all technologies and protocols. User friendliness: I would rate it somewhere around 5/10 in terms of user-friendliness. It can be simpler to build stubs and middle-ware based test cases compared to the solution given by RTVS.