OpenText UFT One vs Qualitia Automation Studio comparison

"The stop automation is a great feature."

"With frequent releases, using automation to perform regression testing can save us huge amount of time and resources."

"Being able to automate different applications makes day-to-day activities a lot easier."

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

"The best feature of UFT by far is its compatibility with a large variety of products, tools and technologies. It is currently a challenge to find a single tool on the market besides UFT that will successfully automate tests for so many projects and environments."

"UFT is very strongly built. It's widely used, so there's a lot of support."

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

"The best feature of this solution is the fact that it offers scriptless automation. You don't need to know how to code or program to use it."

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

"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."

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

"The solution needs better marketing, training, promotion, and visibility because it is not visible."

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

"We used to run it as a test suite. Micro Focus provides that in terms of a test management tool as ALM, but when we think of integrating with a distributed version control system, like Jenkins, there isn't much integration available. That means we need to make use of external solutions to make it work."

"The solution does not have proper scripting."

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

"The integrations for this solutions could be improved, specifically for Slack."

"The pricing of the product is an issue."

"The solution is priced reasonably for what features it is providing. However, it might be expensive for some."

"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."

"OpenText UFT One is a very expensive solution."

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

"The licensing and pricing model is confusing."

"It's an expensive solution."

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

"Pricing is on a higher end but the competition was even more expensive. With this considered, it is a competitive solution."