We performed a comparison between Broadcom Service Virtualization and Orchestrated Service Virtualization based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Broadcom, OpenText, SmartBear and others in Service Virtualization."Unit testing or early life testing did not have to be stopped or delayed because those services were not available."
"You can create virtual services from a live recording or convert raw traffic into request/response pairs."
"Easy to understand ways of creating stubs."
"We are able to quickly scale our requests. We have tested across thousands of requests. We have had no problems so far."
"It is definitely scalable."
"Ability to vary the responses very easily (randomize, pick-lists, etc.)."
"In the case of the virtualization of TCP/IP protocols for third-party terminal insurance, there was a device terminal, which was interacting with the application via the TCP/IP protocol. Most of the tools don't support that, but we were able to achieve it using Broadcom Service Virtualization."
"Helps us to remove barriers that we have with dependencies on services that we don't own, or services that don't even exist yet."
"You can push transactions through to live, and you can intercept some transactions and return them back with mocked data."
"They can always work on usability and making simple things simple to do. This is true of every product that deals with complexity."
"We had to implement an external service catalog. We put it in ServiceNow. I would like to see an integrated service catalog."
"DevTest is pretty massive. It's hard to tell what different parts of it can be used to do different things. They should modulize it more."
"I really want to see more of the "express" kind of model, where you get a little bit for free. I'd love to be able to see you be able to edit and author tests without having to be connected to a licensed server. And then, if you want to go and execute tests, then you go and connect to the server... I think it would unblock people to be able to do a lot more work from home or from remote places, where they can't really connect to the server."
"From a reporting perspective I think we would like to have a more user-friendly approach."
"UI should be more user friendly: better usability, more testing oriented."
"The cost is an area that needs improvement. There are a couple of other tools which provide support for performance testing with the base version itself, but Broadcom needs a separate component to support virtualization for performance testing. This is a costly component."
"Needs some additional lightweight, portable elements."
"The initial setup was complex."
More Broadcom Service Virtualization Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Orchestrated Service Virtualization Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Broadcom Service Virtualization is ranked 1st in Service Virtualization with 97 reviews while Orchestrated Service Virtualization is ranked 6th in Service Virtualization. Broadcom Service Virtualization is rated 8.2, while Orchestrated Service Virtualization is rated 7.0. The top reviewer of Broadcom Service Virtualization writes "Feature-rich, easy to configure and set up, and the support is good". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Orchestrated Service Virtualization writes "Live connectivity benefits but is lacking customization options". Broadcom Service Virtualization is most compared with ReadyAPI Test, Parasoft Virtualize, IBM Rational Test Virtualization Server, OpenText Service Virtualization and Tricentis Tosca, whereas Orchestrated Service Virtualization is most compared with ReadyAPI Virtualization.
See our list of best Service Virtualization vendors.
We monitor all Service Virtualization 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.