We performed a comparison between Oracle Application Testing Suite and Selenium HQ 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."We find the front-end interface of this solution to be very user-friendly, meaning easy navigation even for novice users."
"We do not need a separate test management tool because we have there is a management tool. That is a very good feature. Secondly, it has an inbuilt performance testing tool, which is on flash. It has very good record and playback features as well. And apart from that, there is a good inspection feature. Since it comes with all of the packages, it's very good."
"The solution is scalable."
"The most valuable features are functional testing and the central repository that contains various scripts."
"Has good automation and load-testing capabilities."
"OpenScript has many features that make it useful, including the ability to record and playback."
"We like that we don't need a separate management tool. This is a good feature. It also has an inbuilt performance tool which is on Flash. It has very good record and playback feature as well. The inspection tool is also very good. Overall, since it comes with all the three packages, it's very good."
"I like the functional testing. There's a product inside OATS called OLT, Oracle Load Testing. You can do the load testing without depending on any other tool"
"Selenium's open-source nature is a key advantage. Its extensive support for diverse web technologies."
"Due to its popularity, you can find pretty much any answer in open discussions from the community."
"It is a good automation tool."
"It has helped to complete tests in less time, which would not be possible relying on manual testing only."
"We can run multiple projects at the same time and we can design both types of framework, including data-driven or hybrid. We have got a lot of flexibility here."
"You can build your own framework. I think that's the most powerful feature. You can connect with a lot of other tools that use frameworks, or keywords, etc. That helps make it a stronger solution."
"I like its simplicity."
"What I like about Selenium HQ is that we wrote it ourselves. I think it's perfect. It's a framework that you can use to devise your own products, which is nice."
"The dashboards need to be simplified and made more user-friendly."
"Licensing policies could be more intuitive."
"It needs to be compatible with all browsers."
"I would like to see better dashboards."
"To provide test automation support for other products like SAP, Windows and Java Applications when it comes to Functional Test Automation testing."
"I have faced issues with some indexing items."
"Lacks patches for new OS systems and doesn't work on a Mac."
"Oracle Application Testing Suite does encounter some lag. When I am trying to record something, the tool gets stuck."
"We'd like to see some more image management in future releases."
"It would be very helpful to be able to write scripts in a GUI, rather than depend so heavily on the command line."
"The login could be improved, to obviate the need for relying on another one for integration with Selenium HQ"
"It would be better if we could use it without having the technical skills to run the scripting test."
"I would like to see Selenium HQ support legacy platforms."
"Katalon has built a UI on top of Selenium to make it more user-friendly, as well as repository options and the ability to create repositories for objects, among other things. It would be helpful if this type of information could be included in the Selenium tool itself, so people wouldn't have to do filing testing."
"I don't have that much experience with it, but I know that Selenium is more used for websites. It is not for testing desktop applications, which is a downside of it. It can support desktop applications more."
"It would be very great if Selenium would provide some framework examples so newcomers could get started more quickly."
More Oracle Application Testing Suite Pricing and Cost Advice →
Oracle Application Testing Suite is ranked 13th in Functional Testing Tools with 24 reviews while Selenium HQ is ranked 5th in Functional Testing Tools with 102 reviews. Oracle Application Testing Suite is rated 7.8, while Selenium HQ is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Oracle Application Testing Suite writes "Requires little maintenance, is stable, and easy to deploy". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Selenium HQ writes "Continuously being developed and large community makes it easy to find solutions". Oracle Application Testing Suite is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText UFT One, Apache JMeter, Katalon Studio and Eggplant Test, whereas Selenium HQ is most compared with Eggplant Test, Tricentis Tosca, Worksoft Certify, Telerik Test Studio and OpenText Silk Test. See our Oracle Application Testing Suite vs. Selenium HQ 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.
