CrossBrowserTesting vs OpenText UFT One comparison

"When I started to work on testing automation, I was very excited about how easy it is to run tests on different browsers. It was just a matter of configuration."

"At the moment, all our deploys depend on results of automation. If the tests are failing, then we know that something is wrong at the early stages of development."

"The extensive range of products available to simulate is something I have come to appreciate as it has resulted in an ability to broaden the scope of our tests."

"Record and Replay is the most used functionality for us, as we can record the test cases and play them on multiple combinations of platforms."

"The support team is top-notch. I have a great relationship with them. They are extremely honest and responsive."

"CrossBrowserTesting allows us to test our site with real-world devices in real-world scenarios and find what we're missing."

"Video recording of the script running in a cloud server."

"SmartBear has excellent, informative webinars, so keep an eye out for those."

"I find UFT One to be very good for thick clients, which are non-browser applications."

"It's not only web-based but also for backend applications; you can also do the integration of the applications."

"With certainty, the best feature of UFT is its compatibility with so many products, tools and technologies. It is a challenge currently to find a single tool on the market besides UFT that will successfully work for so many projects and environments. For example, UFT supports GUI testing of Oracle, PeopleSoft, PowerBuilder, SAP (v7.20), Siebel, Stingray, Terminal Emulator, Putty, and Windows Objects (particularly Dialog Boxes). Furthermore, UFT has the built-in functionality to import Excel input files."

"The stop automation is a great feature."

"It helps in identifying defects earlier. With manual testing, that 15-day timeline meant there were times when we would find defects on the 11th or 12th day of the cycle, but with automation we are able to run the complete suite within a day and we are able to find the failures. It helps us to provide early feedback."

"Micro Focus UFT One gives us integration capabilities with both API and GUI components. I like the user interface. It doesn't require that much skill to use and has automatic settings, which is useful for users who don't know what to select. It also has dark and light themes."

"Micro Focus UFT One is a great tool and can be used in a variety of ways."

"Hidden among the kitchen sink of features is a new Data Generation tool called the Test Combinations Generator."

"The screenshot tool defaults to a screen layout instead of a full page test. I find it a bit cumbersome that I can't have it run a full screenshot as my default."

"I have had quite a few issues trying to use a virtual machine to test our application on."

"A problem that we are facing quite often is related to the network connection. Tests can fail if the remote CrossBrowserTesting's VM has connection problems. This happens mostly with browsers of Internet Explorer family which work on Windows OS."

"We had some issues with the onboarding process and the cloud conductivity could improve."

"A wider range of physical devices with more browser versions in the Selenium Grid would be great to insure users with out-of-date devices are able to interact with our sites."

"Sometimes the testing is slow."

"The five minute timeouts can cause irritation if you have just popped away to consult some supporting documentation."

"The speed connection in mobile devices could be improved, because sometimes the load time is uncertain."

"The product doesn't provide free training for the basic features."

"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."

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

"It doesn't support Telerik UI controls and we are currently looking for a patch for this."

"They should include AI-based testing features."

"I would like to have detailed description provided to test the cloud-based applications."

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

"You have to deal with issues such as the firewall and how can the tool talk with the application, i.e., if the application is on a company network and so on. That, of course, is important to figure out."

"CrossBrowserTesting offered the best value for its price."

"The lowest price point is very reasonable. It is also useful if only one person in the company needs to check on the browser display."

"It is worth the pricing as the product is supported on multiple platforms and browsers."

"SmartBear offers bundles of products that work together."

"A few intermediary pricing options for small QA teams would be nice, e.g., unlimited screenshots, "as you need it" parallel tests, etc."

"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 pricing of the product is an issue."

"The price is reasonable."

"For the price of five automation licenses, you simply would not be able to hire five manual testers for two years worth of 24/7 manual testing work on demand."

"There are no additional costs involved apart from the standard license."

"The pricing fee is good. If someone makes use of the solution once a day for a half hour then the fee will be more expensive. For continuous use and application of the solution to different use cases, the fee is average."

"The price is one aspect that could be improved."

"It's an expensive solution."