We performed a comparison between OpenText UFT Digital Lab and OpenText UFT One based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Mobile App Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."For automation testing, the tool provides the record and playback option, which helps with object detection easily."
"The product is easy to use."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is virtualization."
"The fact that it allows users to test on real mobile devices instead of emulators is something that projects have told us is beyond compare."
"It is a complete solution for mobile application testing."
"There are numerous valuable features such as automation, the ones that facilitate importing and synchronization capabilities between our platform, Jira, and Azure DevOps."
"The solution is easy to use. There are features to orchestrate mobile testing, including mobile testing automation. You can test different devices at the same time."
"I like the fact that we can use LeanFT with our UFT licenses as well."
"The high-level security, high standard and compatible SAP are great."
"I like the fact that you can record and play the record of your step scripts, and UFT One creates the steps for you in the code base. After that, you can alter the code, and it's more of a natural language code."
"With frequent releases, using automation to perform regression testing can save us huge amount of time and resources."
"My company has not had an issue with OpenText UFT One since we have been using it for the past three to four years."
"I find UFT One to be very good for thick clients, which are non-browser applications."
"Record and Replay to ease onboarding of new users."
"The inside object repository is nice. We can use that and learn it through the ALM connection. That's a good feature. The reporting and smart identification features are also excellent."
"They should introduce a pay-per-use subscription model."
"The product's object detection method needs to be improved since it can help testers do perfect testing."
"I would like to see more integration with automation tools."
"For the most part, the key challenge is ensuring that customers fully utilize the product as intended and adopt the appropriate frameworks to implement the solutions effectively."
"The documentation and user interface both need improvement."
"We need to scale devices easily. Some customers would like to loop in AWS or other cloud providers to check if their devices have the cloud factor. OpenText UFT Digital Lab needs to improve it."
"We like to host the tools centrally. We would need them to be multi-tenants, so different projects could log on and have their own set of devices and their own set of apps, and they wouldn't see data from other projects that are using it."
"The product should evolve to be flexible so one can use any programming language such as Java and C#, and not just VB script."
"Sometimes UFT can take a while to open and sometimes will run slower than expected."
"Object identification has room for improvement, to make it more efficient."
"Micro Focus UFT One could benefit from creating modules that are more accessible to non-technical users. Without a developer background or at least basic knowledge of VBScript, using Micro Focus UFT One may not be feasible for everyone. This is something that Micro Focus, now owned by OpenText, should consider in order to cater to business professionals as well. While Micro Focus UFT One does have a recording function, it still requires a certain level of IT proficiency to create effective automation, which may be challenging for those outside of the technical field."
"One of the drawbacks is that mobile performance testing is in need of improvement."
"You have to deal with issues such as the firewall and how can the tool talk with the application, i.e., if the application is on a company network and so on. That, of course, is important to figure out."
"It should consume less CPU, and the licensing cost could be lower."
"Needs to improve the integration with the CI/CD pipeline (VSTS and report generation)."
OpenText UFT Digital Lab is ranked 6th in Mobile App Testing Tools with 16 reviews while OpenText UFT One is ranked 2nd in Mobile App Testing Tools with 89 reviews. OpenText UFT Digital Lab is rated 7.4, while OpenText UFT One is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of OpenText UFT Digital Lab writes "Robust solution for application lifecycle management with numerous valuable features". 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". OpenText UFT Digital Lab is most compared with Appium, Perfecto, AWS Device Farm, Sauce Labs and Tricentis Tosca, whereas OpenText UFT One is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText UFT Developer, Katalon Studio, SmartBear TestComplete and Selenium HQ. See our OpenText UFT Digital Lab vs. OpenText UFT One report.
See our list of best Mobile App Testing Tools vendors and best Functional Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Mobile App 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.
