OpenText UFT Developer vs Ranorex Studio comparison

"The most valuable feature is the automation of test cases."

"The solution is very scalable."

"There are many good things. Like it is intuitive and scripting was easy. Plus the availability of experienced resources in India due to its market leadership."

"The cost is the most important factor in this tool."

"It is quite stable, and it has got very user-friendly features, which are important in terms of maintaining our scripts from a long-term perspective. It is very stable for desktop-based, UI-based, and mobile applications. Object repositories and other features are also quite good."

"The most valuable feature for UFT is the ability to test a desktop application."

"The most valuable feature is stability."

"The recording feature is quite good as it helps us to find out how things are working."

"Data security was prime for us. Being able to download and run tests on our local machines was a big plus. The flexibility Ranorex offers in terms of customization is outstanding."

"This is a powerful, reliable and versatile all-around application testing suite."

"The solution is fast and includes built-in libraries that record and playback."

"Code Conversion is one of the great features because sometimes, the automation tool doesn't have the capability of maneuvering around two specific evaluations."

"Object identification is good."

"The most valuable feature of Ranorex Studio is the capture and replay tool. You don't need to do script testing. When you launch any application from Ranorex Studio it automatically captures these test case steps. The next time you can replay the tool the flow automatically happens again. For example, when you do the logging and all the activity will be captured by the tool, and re-execute the same step by using automatization."

"Easy integration with CI Tools like Jenkins, TFS, and TeamCity."

"The solution is intuitive and pretty self-sustaining. You don't need a lot of help with it in terms of setup or assistance."

"The pricing could be improved."

"The product has shown no development over the past 10 or 15 years."

"In the next release, I would like to see integration with different cloud-based tools such as Azure."

"The price of the solution could improve."

"There's room for improvement, especially when I compare OpenText to newer tools like NeoLoad."

"Integration with other tools can become a costly exercise."

"Easier connectivity and integration with SAP would be helpful."

"It would be improved by adding a drag-and-drop interface to help alleviate the coding."

"Binding to other sources is very good but the object recognition in .NET desktop applications often doesn't work."

"Part of the challenge is that Ranorex's support is over in Europe, so we can't get responses on the same day. If we had support in the United States that was a bit more timely, that would be helpful."

"The solution's technical support team could be responsive."

"Other OS Support, Ranorex Spy performance improvement (Especially for Silverlight controls)."

"The automation of the SAP application could perhaps be improved to make it much simpler."

"One of the areas the service could be improved would be to have the training in Italian."

"When we have updated the solution in the past there have been issues with the libraries. They need to make it clear that the libraries need to be upgraded too."

"The solution does not support dual or regression testing."

"It is quite expensive and is priced per seat or in concurrent (or floating) licenses over a period of months."

"The price of the solution could be lowered. The cost is approximately $25 per year for a subscription-based license."

"The pricing is quite high compared to the competition."

"If I would rate it with one being inexpensive and ten being expensive, I would rate pricing an eight out of ten."

"Its cost is a bit high. From the licensing perspective, I am using a concurrent license. It is not a seed license. It is something that I can use in our network. It can also be used by other users."

"The licensing is very expensive, so often, we don't have enough VMs to run all of our tests."

"The cost of this solution is a little bit high and we are considering moving to another solution."

"It is cheap, but if you take the enterprise license, it is valid for both software items."

"Our company has one license per user with each costing two lakh rupees."

"The licensing fees depend on the number of users."

"We paid €3,000 (approximately $3,300 USD) for this solution. When you add the runtime licenses it will be €3,500 (approximately $3,900 USD)."

"Licensing fees are paid on a yearly basis."

"There are several types of licenses and you need to choose depending on your needs and level of usage."

"This solution is a more expensive solution compared to some of the other competitors."