OpenText Business Processing Testing vs OpenText UFT One comparison

"The solution is quite stable with SAP. It's nice. I use it extensively."

"This solution is very helpful to me. I use it to execute my use cases without a manual interface."

"I like the fact that you can record and play the record of your step scripts, and UFT One creates the steps for you in the code base. After that, you can alter the code, and it's more of a natural language code."

"The solution has good out-of-the-box protocols."

"The entire framework is very useful. It's easily integrable with Excel."

"This product is easy to use, understand, and maintain."

"It offers a wide range of testing."

"The most valuable feature for me is that it works on multiple platforms and technologies."

"Compared to other products, UFT One is better, faster, and more accurate."

"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."

"There's only one thing that I think needs improvement. When I started off using this solution, I used the Google search engine to learn how to use the tool. I would also check with my colleagues who have a lot of knowledge about it. Selenium has fields of information available. If you click on that field there will be an explanation about how to use the tool. It will be very easier to understand it if Micro Focus included this feature. It is easy to find with the search button, but it would be a great help to the users who are new to this tool."

"The solution shouldn't be so tightly integrated with the ALM tool that they have. It should have its own base rather than the repository."

"Sometimes UFT can take a while to open and sometimes will run slower than expected."

"I'd like to see UFT integrated more with some of the open source tools like Selenium, where web is involved."

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

"Object identification has room for improvement, to make it more efficient."

"UFT has a recording feature. They could make the recording feature window bigger for whatever activities that I am recording. It would improve the user experience if they could create a separate floating panel (or have it automatically show on the side) once the recording starts."

"The AI feature needs improvement. For banking applications, we input formatted text from documents, but the AI feature is recognizing three fields as one field, e.g., for a phone number, it puts all 10 digits in the international code or country code. Then, the script fails."

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

"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."

"It's an expensive solution."

"The price is only $3,000. I don't know how many QA analysts you would have in any given company. Probably no more than five or 10. So if it's a large corporation, it can easily afford $15,000 to $25,000. I don't see that being an issue."

"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.""

"Compared to other products, the solution is very expensive."

"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."

"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."

"The price is reasonable."

"It took about five years to break even. UFT is costly."