Ranorex Studio vs UiPath Test Suite comparison

"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."

"The solution is stable."

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

"I like the recording function and Ranorex Spy."

"Object identification is good."

"The most valuable feature of Ranorex Studio is its user-friendly interface."

"I'm from a UFT background, so Ranorex Studio has a similar feel in terms of how it handles objects. It just felt familiar even though I'd never seen it before. However, it doesn't have all the bells and whistles of UFT, but it's a pretty good start, and it's cost-effective."

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

"The console, in a single pane, allows us to understand where we are in the testing environment."

"The detailed logging is invaluable."

"It facilitates the delegation of control to multiple users and offers an efficient way to organize tasks using labels."

"What I like most about UiPath Test Suite is that it's straightforward, and any user who knows how to use the UiPath Studio can learn how to create a test script in as fast as thirty minutes. There's nothing new you must learn to use UiPath Test Suite because it only has three sections: Given, Then, and When."

"We can generate our own workflow. In our case, it is a report on the PDF file. In the reporting category, we generally verify a couple of things and generate a lot of reports at the end of the day. It provides some useful details about the data captured from the PDF that we can put into an Excel file."

"It has reduced all the deployment cycles of the automation solutions by forty percent."

"UiPath's tools are generally designed for business users, so they can be as simple or as complex as needed."

"The Test Manager, the final stage of the UiPath Test Suite, is its most valuable feature."

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

"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."

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

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

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

"We are mainly working for manufacturing OEMs but the integration is not available. It would be a benefit if they built one integration tool for all the Teamcenter home servers and software as the main PLM data source. It is a simple process at this time, the integration could be made easier."

"I would like to be able to customize the data grids. They are currently written in Visual Basic and we are unable to get down to the cell level without hard-code."

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

"They could improve the visualization of the product."

"I'd like the solution to be even more automated."

"The product releases sometimes have issues."

"We have output arguments in the workflow. We can check results only by using those arguments. It would be better to have some more options, such as screen variables. For example, in a workflow, if we want to check if an activity is present inside, we should be able to get the output to UiPath Test Suite through the activity itself. That would be great for testing."

"The pricing isn't as low as other options."

"We are facing problems specifically with Desk Manager."

"Storing the test scripts is what needs to improve in the UiPath Test Suite, as it's currently a challenge to some extent. Maintaining the files is a bit challenging, especially when you need to keep those locally."

"The reporting could be improved. Often, we need to email a report to higher management, we can directly get the report from there. Also, the error reporting could be better."

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

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

"Licensing fees are paid on a yearly basis."

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

"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)."

"UiPath Test Suite is a cost-effective solution. Orchestrator is the most expensive UiPath module, costing around $20,000, but you don't need to purchase Orchestrator to use Test Suite. You can buy a nonproductive version that costs about $2,400. It's a better value than other products I've seen."

"Its price is a bit high."

"It represents good value for the investment."

"One robot license costs 1,500 euros."

"I wasn't involved in the negotiations for the UiPath Test Suite, so I have no information on its pricing."

"It is a little bit more expensive than Selenium, but it provides value for money. There are multiple types of licenses such as the Test Suite license, Studio Pro license, Test Manager license, and Test Robot license. The overall cost estimation is 13,800 dollars."

"I am not aware of the exact cost. It seems reasonable, but it is an additional cost."

"When we decided to buy the solution three and a half years ago, it was fairly priced."