Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

BrowserStack vs OpenText UFT Digital Lab comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
7.4
BrowserStack's customer service is praised for responsiveness, quick issue resolution, and knowledgeable staff, with minor improvement suggestions.
Sentiment score
6.9
OpenText UFT Digital Lab's support is effective with helpful service, though response time for enhancements and online-only documentation can challenge.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.4
BrowserStack is scalable, with license expansions and updated OS access, but faces cost, platform support, and connectivity issues.
Sentiment score
7.6
OpenText UFT Digital Lab's scalability receives mixed feedback, praised for flexibility yet critiqued for decentralized device management limitations.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
6.8
BrowserStack is praised for stability and reliability, despite occasional connectivity issues and device crashes, with strong performance and pricing.
Sentiment score
7.2
OpenText UFT Digital Lab is stable, mature, and effective, with minor device issues and initial deployment challenges noted by users.
 

Room For Improvement

BrowserStack needs improved visibility, file uploads, integrations, speed, support, pricing, device options, AI features, and accessibility testing.
OpenText UFT Digital Lab requires improvements in connectivity, integration, customization, multi-tenant support, and enhanced compatibility for better user experience.
 

Setup Cost

BrowserStack's tailored enterprise plans are cost-effective compared to Perfecto, offering customizable licenses despite mixed affordability perceptions.
OpenText UFT Digital Lab's pricing is competitive despite additional costs, with ratings ranging from three to seven out of ten.
 

Valuable Features

BrowserStack offers fast, flexible testing across diverse OS and devices with automation, local testing, and seamless integration capabilities.
OpenText UFT Digital Lab enhances testing with real and emulated devices, seamless tool integration, and global device pool support.
 

Categories and Ranking

BrowserStack
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
3rd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
25
Ranking in other categories
AI-Augmented Software-Testing Tools (1st)
OpenText UFT Digital Lab
Ranking in Functional Testing Tools
19th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
Mobile App Testing Tools (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2024, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of BrowserStack is 11.2%, up from 10.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText UFT Digital Lab is 0.9%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Functional Testing Tools
 

Featured Reviews

ANand Kale - PeerSpot reviewer
Good in the area of automation and offers a high test coverage to users
I integrated BrowserStack into our company's web and application test workflows because it has plugins that work with browsers and applications, allowing for cross-browser testing. BrowserStack was really helpful for cross-browser testing in areas involving mobiles, web applications, or tablets. The tool can help with the testing across all applications. I have not experienced any time-saving feature from the use of the tool. My company uses the product for real-device testing since it has a bunch of devices in our library. My company has a repository where we do manual testing. BrowserStack improved the quality of our company's applications. Improvements I have seen with the testing part revolve around the fact that it is able to do testing at a fast pace. The quality of the product is better since it can go through all the parts of the applications, meaning it can provide high test coverage. The tool is also good in the area of automation. The test coverage is higher, and the time taken during the testing phase is less due to automation. I have not used the product's integration capabilities since my company doesn't have the option to look at other QA testing tools like Selenium, which can be used for the automation capabilities provided. The product should offer more support for cross-browser testing, device testing, and testing across multiple devices. I rate the tool an eight out of ten.
Robinson Caiado - PeerSpot reviewer
Automates mobile solutions while boosting productivity and fostering innovation
It allows multiple devices to be used and gives flexibility in adding devices when a project is needed. Most of the time, I have several devices where it is predefined. We can use it, but sometimes, we must scale it in a particular situation. It's very flexible. It is very important because we can use a different approach to software testing, for example, to find a way to execute UFT software testing with only one execution. This reproduces all the platforms that we need.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
824,067 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Retailer
6%
Financial Services Firm
25%
Computer Software Company
19%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Retailer
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about BrowserStack?
The product's initial setup phase was not very difficult.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for BrowserStack?
My company found the product's license to be very compatible with our budget, and we pay 5,000 to 10,000 per year for licenses.
What needs improvement with BrowserStack?
I haven't seen AI in BrowserStack, making it in an area where improvements are required in the product. Accessibility testing is an area of concern where improvements are required.
What do you like most about Micro Focus UFT Mobile?
For automation testing, the tool provides the record and playback option, which helps with object detection easily.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus UFT Mobile?
Sometimes, it's challenging to have relations with OpenText support.
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus UFT Mobile?
We use it in financial services companies to automate mobile solutions and applications.
 

Also Known As

No data available
Micro Focus UFT Digital Lab, Micro Focus UFT Mobile, Mobile Center, Micro Focus Mobile Center, HPE Mobile Center
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Microsoft, RBS, jQuery, Expedia, Citrix, AIG
Bci, BPER Services, Die Mobiliar, Harvard Pilgrim Healthcare, HPE, Independent Health, Shanghai OnStar Telematics, Pick n Pay, UCB
Find out what your peers are saying about BrowserStack vs. OpenText UFT Digital Lab and other solutions. Updated: December 2024.
824,067 professionals have used our research since 2012.