AutonomIQ TestIQ vs OpenText UFT One comparison

"UI is one of the best features of AutonomIQ TestIQ."

"The interface is fine and there is nothing else to add in terms of enhancement."

"I like the Help feature in UFT One. For example, if you are navigating a particular window, where there are different options. One wouldn’t know the purpose of every option, but there is no need to search because that window contains a Help button. If you click on that Help button, it directly navigates to the respective help needed. VBScript is very easy to understand and easy to prepare scripts with minimal learning curve."

"It's simple to set up."

"Object Repository Technology, which is a good mean to identify graphical components of the applications under test."

"My company has not had an issue with OpenText UFT One since we have been using it for the past three to four years."

"The production and the efficiency of making your test cases can be very high."

"It offers a wide range of testing."

"The scalability of Micro Focus UFT One is good."

"The ability to capture and record with the help of automation is not there in AutonomIQ TestIQ."

"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."

"They need to reduce the licensing cost. There's pushback from customers because of the cost."

"The price is very high. They should work to lower the costs for their clients."

"I would want to see a significant improvement in the tool's features. The most significant enhancements are support for panel execution and integration with DevSecOps."

"The UA objects are sometimes hard to recognize, so the coverage should be increased. Open-source alternatives have a broad scope. Also, it's sometimes difficult to make connections between two of the components in the UFT mobile center. It should be easier to set up the wireless solution because we have to set both. We directly integrate Selenium and APM, so we should try to cover all the features they have in APM and Selenium with the UFT mobile."

"Perhaps more coverage as far as different languages go. I'm talking more about object identification."

"They should include an automated feature to load backlog tests."

"I'd like to see test case-related reports included in the solution."

"It's an expensive solution."

"Compared to other tools in the market, UFT One is very competitive. The recent Covid pandemic situation also hit customer budgets significantly, so Micro Focus offered some discounted prices, which is definitely competitive."

"The way the pricing model works is that you pay a whole boatload year one. Then, every year after, it is around half or less. Because instead of paying for the new product, you are just paying for the support and maintenance of it. That is probably one of the biggest things that I hear from most people, even at conferences, "Yeah, I would love to use UFT One, but we don't have a budget for it.""

"HPE recently extended the demo license period from 30 days to 60 days which was a very wise and popular decision to give potential customers more time to install it and try it for free. Even if your company has a salesperson come in and demo UFT, I would highly encourage at least one of your developers or automation engineers to download and install it to explore for themselves the functionality and features included during the demo trial period."

"The licensing cost is high. There are no additional costs to the standard license."

"OpenText UFT One is a very expensive solution."

"Its price is reasonable compared to other vendors."

"We have ALM licensing, and the tool is free of cost."