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."The solution is scalable."
"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"
"Oracle Application Testing Suite's most valuable feature is it works very smoothly with all Oracle Java-based applications."
"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."
"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 function test feature is valuable."
"OpenScript has many features that make it useful, including the ability to record and playback."
"The most valuable feature is the object identification feature."
"Selenium HQ lets you create your customized functions with whatever language you want to use, like Python, Java, .NET, etc. You can integrate with Selenium and write."
"The most valuable features are ExpectedConditions, actions, assertions, verifications, flexible rates, and third-party integrations."
"In general, I would say that the API set is the most valuable feature."
"The grids, as well as the selectors, are the most valuable features."
"It supports many external plugins, and because it's a Java-based platform, it's language-independent. You can use Java, C#, Python, etc."
"Selenium HQ has a lot of capabilities and is compatible with many languages."
"It supports most of the mainstream browsers such as Chrome, Firefox, IE and etc."
"Our platform runs into several thousand screens and a few thousand test cases, something which would typically take months to test manually. As of today, the entire process takes a little over two days to run."
"Licensing policies could be more intuitive."
"Oracle Application Testing Suite could improve by offering desktop-based application automation. It is lacking in this area at the moment."
"We would like to see the instruction documentation made into video or audio formats, to help new users get used to the modules."
"I have faced issues with some indexing items."
"To provide test automation support for other products like SAP, Windows and Java Applications when it comes to Functional Test Automation testing."
"The dashboards need to be simplified and made more user-friendly."
"It needs to be compatible with all browsers."
"I would like to see better dashboards."
"The solution does not offer up enough information in regards to personality testing."
"Whenever an object is changed or something is changed in the UI, then we have to refactor the code."
"I would like to see a library of bomb files with an automated process and integration with Jenkins and Slack."
"The installation could be simplified, it is a bit difficult to install."
"Selenium HQ doesn't support Windows-based applications, so we need to integrate with the third-party vendor. It would be great if Selenium could include Windows-based automation. You need to integrate it with a third-party tool if you want to upload any files. When we interact with a Windows application, we usually use Tosca."
"It is not a licensed tool. The problem with that is that it won't be able to support Windows desktop applications. There is no support for Windows desktop applications. They can do something about it. Its user interface can also be improved, which is not great compared to the other latest tools. Anybody who has been working on functional testing or manual testing cannot directly work on Selenium HQ without learning programming skills, which is a disadvantage."
"There are stability issues with Internet Explorer only."
"I would like to see Selenium HQ support legacy platforms."
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 "Easy to use with great pricing and lots of documentation". 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.