Broadcom Service Virtualization Reviews

It allows you to have a bunch of manual testers who can easily use the tool set, as well as hardcore devs or SDETs who know how to code. They can also use the tool set.

And, on the virtualization side, it really kind of helps you save money, because you can unblock yourself. If something's not ready, you can go and virtualize that, unblock your automation. We actually found in the last project that we should have used more virtualization, because our environment wasn't really stable. And so, we should have virtualized the things that we were automating so that we could demonstrate the automation wasn't the problem. That was always a question mark for people, and so that's a takeaway that I'll do again on the next project.

A couple of the most valuable features, to me, are the fact that you can have a lot of different people with different technologies use the tool, without any programming experience at all, all the way up to people who can program. And then, the more technical that you are, the more programming you have, the more you're able to customize the tool. Basically customize it to do what you want it to do. That's one thing. 

The other thing is, it's got probably the greatest amount of features, in terms of different technologies that you can automate and virtualize, out of any of the solutions out there. So, it really can accomplish any task that you want to do with it.

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. That's a request I've been making, and I'd like to see that. I think it's in line with the open source model, and 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.

It's very stable. It's very robust. 

I have noticed that sometimes memory consumption can get high if you use the tool repeatedly. But, it's pretty manageable. It's come a long way. I've used it for multiple versions, and I'm on version 10 now, and I'm very happy with the stability. 

It's very scalable. The server, we've actually scaled it up quite a bit. One of the projects I was on, we were running thousands of tests, and the server wasn't really set up to handle that. So, we increased the amount of coordinators, and RAM, and processing power. And, just by making those small changes, we were easily able to scale to, like, thousands and thousands of tests. I'm happy with the scalability.

I wasn't using any previous solution. When I came to T-Mobile, SV was a fairly new tool at T-Mobile. So, we didn't have any other previous solution. We used this one, and none of the other solutions that have been out there have been better, so we've kept using it. Didn't need to switch, and we have been continuing to invest in it, because it's been meeting and exceeding our needs.

I give it between an eight and a nine out of 10. I don't ever really give 10s, because I always think that things can be improved, so it's a great product.

The most valuable features are the web service harness and the service virtualization.

We have been able to enact a 'shift left' in our testing. In addition, I built an automated regression test pack for our teams. Thanks to CA Service Virtualization, we have new functionality (the ability to stub services we rely on) and we can test our own APIs in an efficient manner.

The GUI can be hard to navigate. The ITR keeps pulling the screen to the front. The speed can be improved as well.

We have been using this solution for close to two years.

We did not encounter any issues with stability.

We did not encounter any issues with scalability.

Technical support was provided from our work team. It was sufficient, but the response time was slow.

Initially, we used scripts, JCL, and CICS transactions. CA Service Virtualization has simplified and enhanced this process.

The setup was straightforward. The development of the harnesses was more challenging.

Before buying the license, make sure that you try the product and are happy that it can provide the service testing capabilities that you require. Have people in your team who can invest the time to gain skills in CA Service Virtualization.

Our team did evaluate other products, such as SoapUI and Topaz.

Make sure you understand the potential of the solution and that it will take time to make it work.

• MQ virtualisation
• Web service virtualisation

Time-to-market has been a lot easier and quicker. QA can start automating from the beginning and developers can do unit testing faster. Third-party integration is not required so you save money by virtualizing third-party services.

Integration with Selenium and GUI testing needs improvement. Supporting more new technologies and existing technologies such as Flex, Salesforce, etc. would also be nice.

I've used it for five years.

There were problems where it doesn't support the technology. We have to write custom functions ourselves. This means our licensing cost is more higher and makes it harder to sell our products to small vendors.

There were no issues with the stability.

There have been no issues scaling the solution.

Customer service is good.

Technical support is good.

I have worked with SoapUI Pro, HP ServiceTest (now UFT), IBM RIT, etc. This product was taken by a customer and it was one of the best products for virtualization.

It takes some time, but after one or two tries it becomes easy.

We used a vendor team who performed nice work. If they supported new technologies it would be better as it's expensive.

Over about a year, we have saved over half a million for our customer.

It's a good product for virtualization, but the price is high although we won’t regret it for this product.

Virtualizing different protocols, data driving the request and response values, window to script if anything additional is needed from the virtual service.

Setting up a virtual service is very quick and hence is very easy to continue testing without waiting much.

The tool is growing with every release. I don't have any real concerns. Also, the development team usually prioritizes requests once they are raised with them.

2 years

No Major deployment issues.

No issues in terms of stability.

No issues with scalability of service.

9 out of 10. They are very quick in responding back with any queries.

9 out of 10. They are very quick in responding back with any technical issues or queries.

Yes, I have used similar solutions from two other vendors but love the UI, and ease of use of CA Service Virtualization.

If it's your first time using it you will face difficulties but afterwords everything is just few clicks away.

Test - service layer component testing automation)

Virtualize - the best mocking/stubbing tool I've ever seen, allows for easier data management

With Service Virtualization being a newer concept and market, there is a lack of high quality/experienced resources available across the board for any of the tools (as of mid 2013)...with that said, a good developer can come up to speed fairly quickly with this tool.

Can't wait to see the integration w/ Shunra, Nolio and Grid Tools in the near future!

It is throughout the STLC, so we actually have rights from the PoC or idealization from testing, development, and even production support where someone would like to use it for certification, or a sandbox perspective.

It is easy to use, has a faster time to market, and provides flexibility. 

On our customer side, we have actually done a lot with this particular tool. It has helped a lot of teams to accelerate their testing and development, and saved a lot of money on the infrastructure side, setting up the sandbox side, etc.

• Flexibility
• Ease of use
• How much easier or faster we can actually make something happen.

1. The enterprise catalog. Usually what happens is once you have a set of virtual services, then you go to an enterprise. So, people would like to see what is already virtualized and how can they take advantage of it. Right now, it is actually not part of the product, therefore we created something, a custom solution, for it at this point of time. These are two separate things. Sometimes, we have to put some effort into it. If it could be part of the product itself, a service catalog where a user could actually come and see what is already virtualized, how they could actually utilize it, and the value it adds.
2. The access control to the new portal. There is a new portal available and we are making it as a self-service thing. Whoever wants to create their own virtual service so they can actually go there and create the virtual service. The problem we have right now is how do we restrict access to each of those virtual services or the projects. So, that is not implemented in the product yet.
3. Cloud readiness. I know it is available in AWS, but we would like to see how we can actually make it more cloud-friendly.

It is much better now with the newer version. We have had issues when they moved it to a newer platform of a base platform a couple of releases back. So, we had issues in the past, but I would say of the latest version, 10.1, that we are using, it is in a much better position. But there are still areas to improve and we are actually working with CA to give feedback, and they are continuously trying to improve the product.

It is scalable. We actually use it for both functional and performance purposes. In the functional area, it actually works pretty well. In the performance area, we do not know where the limit is at this point of time. So far, it has actually worked well and we are able to bring it to multiple environments. Therefore, I would say it is pretty scalable at this point of time.

They are very prompt and very easy to work with. I have been working on this product for the last six or seven years, so I know most of the support team. It is pretty easy to work with, explain things to them, and get the right support. Also, I am able to get additional details about new feature releases, so it is actually pretty good.

The initial setup was straightforward. We did have some problems with the one of the upgrades. CA actually releases a new version every year, so we try to catch up with it. We have had issues with the prior to last upgrade. This one was okay, the latest one.

We actually did PoCs with other tools, then came up with the pros and cons. This was the product that checked the most boxes.

It does what it promises. I would definitely recommend to take a look at this solution, because of the ease of it.

Record and learn response patterns: It helps us to record traffic and learn automatically response patterns. This feature helps us to virtualize quickly and build an exact copy of the web services.

This product helps us to:

• Simulate broken/nonexistent systems
• Avoid latency between project
• Perform load bearing testing on unavailable external systems

More docs/code samples to develop custom steps: Sometimes we need to develop in web services custom behaviors that simulate technically and functionally the real service.

I have used it for two years.

Technical support is 9/10.

It provides for automated testing of applications, including the following features:

• Wide technology support (SOAP/REST web services, message queues, web UI using Selenium, database queries);
• Support to build modular test cases using reusable blocks (called sub-processes in DevTest);
• Extensibility using Java;
• Integration with Jenkins continuous integration tool; and

• Detailed test execution reports.

We've already created and switched over 10,000 test cases from manual to automated execution. Our QA team can now focus more on complex manual test cases.

I would like to see a completely web-oriented automated test case design (currently need to use desktop application called DevTest Workstation). I'd also like to see IntelliSense-like functionality for custom scripting, as well as improvements to reports for test cases using datasets to quickly point to/locate results for specific data iteration.

I've used it for one year.

We experienced some minor issues, but they've been fixed in the current release.

We experienced some minor issues, but they've been fixed in the current release.

We experienced some minor issues, but they've been fixed in the current release.

Very good, as support person is usually trying to do even more than expected. There’s also a web site by CA called Communities where product users can help each other.

I’ve used HP QTP/UFT tool for other clients, specifically for automated GUI-based testing of desktop applications (.NET/WPF, Stingray, Java Swing). I can’t directly answer question about choosing CA DevTest as I was not in the tool decision group for current clients, but it’s very suitable for SOAP, REST, JMS, DB testing. CA DevTest would not be suitable for GUI-based testing of desktop applications which our current client does not need.

The initial set-up was not complicated thanks to the detailed documentation available.

We used an in-house team with occasional help from the vendor support team.

I believe this product will meet your expectations if you’re looking for automated testing solution for any of the supported technologies. It also offers other major functionalities such as CAI for transaction recording and automated generation of test cases and virtual services which we’re planning to use.