We performed a comparison between Appium and OpenText LoadRunner Professional based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about OutSystems, Mendix, Salesforce and others in Mobile Development Platforms."The solution is stable."
"Appium has easy interaction with mobile."
"The solution is easy to use."
"Appium helps me to do as much as much as I want to."
"The most valuable feature of Appium is it supports iOS and AOS and is open-source."
"It has great documentation and excellent community support."
"We do not need to pay for the solution. It’s free."
"We get a list that shows all devices that are connected to the system."
"I like the user interface. I like the way we can divide our scenarios and can tune them. The integration with the quality center is great. These features are really good."
"The initial setup and installation of the software were very easy and straightforward."
"I recommend LoadRunner Professional as it supports many protocols and applications and is very easy to set up and use."
"The solution supports a lot of protocols."
"The front loader and the reporting features are the most valuable aspects of OpenText LoadRunner Professional."
"I am impressed with the tool's correlation function."
"It has good protocol coverage."
"LoadRunner Professional allowed us to load test potential new payroll solutions that would be implemented throughout the entire organization so that we knew which was best suited to performing well under pressure."
"If it had more facility for configuration it would be a spectacular solution."
"One thing which can be really helpful is that there is some kind of a recorder made available rather than scripting everything."
"Support-wise, it could be better."
"We haven't been able to fully leverage Appium for multiple reasons. I think number one is just that the tests take a long time to run. We have had some issues around just the results themselves and how predictable they are, but those are not issues with Appium directly."
"The tool needs to add a dependency manager."
"Appium can improve when the case fails, there should be a feature where you can generate the report from Appium. Once you're on a test case, automatically the screenshot should be captured which would avoid manual intervention. These features would be beneficial to migrate to Appium."
"Appium could improve by enabling record and run techniques similar to what they have in other licensing tools, such as Micro Focus. We have to all write the code, and then we can proceed."
"Image recognition could be improved. We have some images in our mobile applications. It should be able to run from the cloud, so we can automate the catcher."
"There is room for improvement of the pilot processing, the dump analysis, and forwarding results based on the dump analysis. We have a generator, root controller, different agents, and an analyzer, so all of these are very important when it comes to LoadRunner."
"Compared to some other vendors, there is a lack of community support."
"The tool needs to work on capture script feature."
"I would like the solution to include monitoring capacity."
"We still have some issues with integration with things like SiteScope which, obviously, being another HPE product should be very straightforward, but there are always issues around that."
"You should be able to use LoadRunner as a single platform. You should be able to have browser based access. You should be able to run enterprise tests."
"IBM WebSphere MQ testing can be a bit challenging. It can handle that, but I hope that they will build more and more capabilities. We do a huge amount of testing for messaging. Just like aviation, the railway industry is based on messaging. There is messaging to build trains and messaging to create some bills. There are many train movements. Everything involves messaging. I wish that it will be developed more for IBM WebSphere testing. Monitoring is okay, but for testing, I currently have to create Java users. I have to load a lot of libraries from IBM WebSphere and so on."
"The technical support of Micro Focus LoadRunner Professional could improve. I had an issue with the licensing and their response time is slow. They can improve on this in the future."
More OpenText LoadRunner Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
Appium is ranked 7th in Mobile Development Platforms with 25 reviews while OpenText LoadRunner Professional is ranked 2nd in Performance Testing Tools with 77 reviews. Appium is rated 8.0, while OpenText LoadRunner Professional is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Appium writes "It's easy to launch applications". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText LoadRunner Professional writes "A sophisticated tool that supports many languages and works with all kinds of applications". Appium is most compared with Katalon Studio, Tricentis Tosca, Perfecto, Xamarin Platform and Apache JMeter, whereas OpenText LoadRunner Professional is most compared with Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Enterprise, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, Apache JMeter and IBM Rational Performance Tester.
We monitor all Mobile Development Platforms 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.