We performed a comparison between IBM DevOps Test UI 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."IBM Rational Functional Tester is very contextual."
"It is compatible with all sorts of Dark Net applications. Its coverage is very good."
"The most valuable feature is the UI component tester."
"Test automation is most valuable because it saves a lot of time."
"Record and Replay to ease onboarding of new users."
"The scalability of Micro Focus UFT One is good."
"The most valuable feature of Micro Focus UFT One is you are able to use it with many other technologies. I have not had an instance where the solution was not able to automate or execute automation. I was able to use COBOL to manage some automation."
"The most valuable feature is that it is fast during test execution, unlike LoadRunner."
"Object Repository Technology, which is a good mean to identify graphical components of the applications under test."
"The shared repositories can be used throughout all testing which makes jobs easier."
"The most valuable feature for me is that it works on multiple platforms and technologies."
"It's easy to use for beginners and non-technical people."
"The latest version has increased load time before testing can be run."
"As many of our products are moving from PC to mobile, the most important thing that this solution needs is mobile app support."
"They need to do a complete revamp so that even a non-technical person can manage the tool."
"If the solution is running on Linux, there are some issues around application compatibility."
"One area for improvement is its occasional slowness."
"Technical support could be improved."
"There is a lot of room for improvement when it comes to friction-free continuous testing across the software life cycle, as a local installation is required to run UFT."
"The price is very high. They should work to lower the costs for their clients."
"Micro Focus UFT One could improve by having more maintenance. Every time when we run the solution and develop something, the next time when we run it it doesn't recognize the object. I have to redesign the object again and then run the solution. It's really a headache, it's not consistent."
"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."
"The scripting language could be improved. They're currently using Visual Basic, but I think that people need something more advanced, like Python or Java."
"We'd like it to have less scripting."
IBM DevOps Test UI is ranked 22nd in Functional Testing Tools with 8 reviews while OpenText UFT One is ranked 2nd in Functional Testing Tools with 89 reviews. IBM DevOps Test UI is rated 7.2, while OpenText UFT One is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of IBM DevOps Test UI writes "Reliable test automation, and test data creation with efficient support". 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". IBM DevOps Test UI is most compared with Katalon Studio, Tricentis Tosca, Selenium HQ, HCL OneTest and Ranorex Studio, whereas OpenText UFT One is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, OpenText UFT Developer, Katalon Studio, SmartBear TestComplete and UiPath Test Suite. See our IBM DevOps Test UI 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.
