We performed a comparison between BrowserStack and OpenText UFT One based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Functional Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature is the variety the solution offers around the different types of devices, especially mobile devices."
"The product guides and resources are extensive and very helpful."
"The most valuable feature is that it provides parallel and cross-browser testing. It enables us to run tests on multiple browsers or devices simultaneously."
"The most valuable features are the variety of tools available."
"I've worked on testing integrations with BrowserStack, particularly with a platform called IT. This involves testing the registration process, including receiving verification codes on devices and phones. BrowserStack has been excellent for testing these integrations, providing a seamless workflow development experience."
"The setup was quite simple. The website easily explains how to set it up and if you want to integrate it with BMP tools there are online simple step tutorials."
"We like the model device factory for iOS and Android devices."
"It is a scalable solution."
"The most valuable feature for me is that it works on multiple platforms and technologies."
"For traditional automation, approximately half of our tests end up automated. Therefore, we are saving half the testing time by pushing it off to automation. That gives it an intrinsic benefit of more time for manual testers and business testers to work on possibly more important and interesting things. For some of our applications, they don't just have to do happy path testing anymore, they can go more in-depth and breadth into the process."
"I like the Help feature in UFT One. For example, if you are navigating a particular window, where there are different options. One wouldn’t know the purpose of every option, but there is no need to search because that window contains a Help button. If you click on that Help button, it directly navigates to the respective help needed. VBScript is very easy to understand and easy to prepare scripts with minimal learning curve."
"The most valuable features for us are the GUI, the easy identification of objects, and folder structure creation."
"With frequent releases, using automation to perform regression testing can save us huge amount of time and resources."
"I find UFT One to be very good for thick clients, which are non-browser applications."
"My company has not had an issue with OpenText UFT One since we have been using it for the past three to four years."
"The production and the efficiency of making your test cases can be very high."
"I haven't seen AI in BrowserStack, making it in an area where improvements are required in the product."
"One of the biggest issues with BrowserStack is that if you don't have your network set up by the book, it's hard to get it to work with local desk machines."
"I would like for there to be more integration with BrowserStack and other platforms."
"BrowserStack should work on its Internet connectivity although issues only occur occasionally."
"We are struggling to do local testing."
"We are having difficulty with the payment system for the BrowserStack team, as they only accept credit cards and we are encountering some issues."
"Connectivity can sometimes mar the testing experience."
"BrowserStack operates at a slow pace, it could improve by making it faster."
"It could work with more browsers other than Internet Explorer, and could better handle new things like Ext JS."
"Object identification has room for improvement, to make it more efficient."
"UFT has a recording feature. They could make the recording feature window bigger for whatever activities that I am recording. It would improve the user experience if they could create a separate floating panel (or have it automatically show on the side) once the recording starts."
"The artificial intelligence functionality is applicable only on the web, and it should be expanded to cover non-web applications as well."
"The AI feature needs improvement. For banking applications, we input formatted text from documents, but the AI feature is recognizing three fields as one field, e.g., for a phone number, it puts all 10 digits in the international code or country code. Then, the script fails."
"It doesn't support Telerik UI controls and we are currently looking for a patch for this."
"One of the drawbacks is that mobile performance testing is in need of improvement."
"[Tech support is] not a 10 because what happens with some of our issues is that we might not get a patch quickly and we have to hold on to an application until we get a proper solution."
BrowserStack is ranked 4th in Functional Testing Tools with 25 reviews while OpenText UFT One is ranked 2nd in Functional Testing Tools with 89 reviews. BrowserStack is rated 8.0, while OpenText UFT One is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of BrowserStack writes "Good in the area of automation and offers a high test coverage to users". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText UFT One writes "With regularly occurring releases, a QA team member can schedule tests, let the tests run unattended, and then examine the results". BrowserStack is most compared with LambdaTest, Sauce Labs, Perfecto, Tricentis Tosca and HeadSpin, whereas OpenText UFT One is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText UFT Developer, Katalon Studio, SmartBear TestComplete and UiPath Test Suite. See our BrowserStack vs. OpenText UFT One report.
See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors and best Regression Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Functional Testing Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
