It's allowed us to perform functional testing (to verify a specific action or function of code) for each product update.
Analyst Programmer at a university with 1,001-5,000 employees
We can use it to improve the productivity for some repeatable routine tasks, but there was a Java conflict during setup.
What is most valuable?
How has it helped my organization?
We can use HP UFT not only in testing for each product update(s), but also to improve the productivity for some repeatable routine tasks.
What needs improvement?
We would like to see smart identification (captures a unique object during testing) work more reliably.
For how long have I used the solution?
I've used it for two years.
Buyer's Guide
OpenText UFT One
November 2024
Learn what your peers think about OpenText UFT One. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: November 2024.
824,067 professionals have used our research since 2012.
What was my experience with deployment of the solution?
Our initial deployment was complex and there was a Java conflict we had to resolve.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
We've had no issues with stability.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
We've had no scalability issues.
How are customer service and support?
We don't use HP technical support.
How was the initial setup?
The setup was complex as we were required to have Windows updated. Also, there was apparently a Java conflict that had to be resolved first.
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Software Test Engineer at a tech vendor with 51-200 employees
It allowed me to generate script that increased the number of full-process test cases from eight to 100, but when I ran the script for two or three times sequentially, the tool hung.
What is most valuable?
I used almost all the features. To me, the the most valuable features were the OR and code compiler (VB script) to call the framework.
How has it helped my organization?
I worked for Weight Watchers on a diabetes product which had three main modules -- signup, questionnaire, and calendar.
The manual resource was created for eight users for full processing, but after I generated the script, I did the full process for the same test cases for up to 100 users.
What needs improvement?
- Spy elements
- OR
For how long have I used the solution?
I used it from February to December 2014.
What was my experience with deployment of the solution?
No issues encountered.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
When I ran the script for two or three times sequentially, the tool hung and wouldn’t respond.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
There were issues with browsers when supporting more elements such as CSS and HTML.
How are customer service and technical support?
Customer Service:
8/10 - because they have good technical knowledge and the response is really fast.
Technical Support:I connected with technical support only a few times, so it is not fair for me to rate them. But for the few times I did, it is 8/10.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
I did, and I switched because the newer tools have many features and many options such as browser support, responsive design, and is faster. However, there are free and open source tools.
How was the initial setup?
It was straightforward.
What about the implementation team?
It was done through a vendor team who were mid-level in experience.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
The license is expensive.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
I came to the company and they were using the tool, but there were other options for them choose to choose from such as Selenium and Node.js.
What other advice do I have?
You need to improve the support browsers and responsive design, and try to use newer and better languages (JS).
Also, check the stability of your product(s) when you run a lot of scripts.
They should reduce the price.
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Buyer's Guide
OpenText UFT One
November 2024
Learn what your peers think about OpenText UFT One. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: November 2024.
824,067 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Test Automation Engineer at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees
Improved our ability to test in varied environments and browsers.
What is most valuable?
- UFT12 supports IE11, Firefox until v24 and Chrome browser until v30, operating systems and environments
- When the test contains any unmapped repository parameter, the Errors pane displays the test name and path in the Item column
- UFT12 fully supports the .xlsx format of Excel files for importing data to the Data Table or when specifying an Excel file for use with ALM configurations
- The InsightObject.Click method brings the Insight object’s parent test object into focus before performing the click. In some cases, this change of focus may hide your Insight object in the application, making it impossible for UFT to find and click it. In those cases, you can use the new InsightObject.ClickSpecial method, which does not bring the parent test object into focus before clicking
- When using Insight to recognize objects, UFT searches for objects on your screen that match a stored test object image. When modifying a test object’s image, you can now specify areas within the image that UFT ignores when searching for a match. This is useful if parts of an object do not always look the same. For example, if different icons are used on different operating systems to run a certain application
- Standard VBScript provides the CreateObject function, which enables creating 32-bit COM object references. UFT has added theCreateObject64 statement, enabling you to create 64-bit COM object references
- The popular Save with Resources feature from QuickTest is now also available for GUI Tests in UFT. It comes in handy if you need to open or run a test when you do not have access to a network drive or ALM. For example, you may need to create a portable copy of a test for use when traveling to other sites. Using the File > Save (Other) > Save with Resources command, you can save everything you need to a local drive or to another storage device. When you use this option, UFT creates a copy of the test, its resource, and any external actions called by your test, and adjust the references from your test to the resources and external actions so that you can use them locally
- The UFT Web Add-in now supports the following additional objects for HTML5 object recognition:
- WebAudio. Supports recognition of HTML audio objects
- WebVideo. Supports recognition of HTML5 video objects
- WebNumber. Supports recognition of HTML5 number objects. These objects may look like numeric edit boxes or up-down spin controls, depending on the browser
- WebRange. Supports recognition of HTML5 range objects
- In previous versions of UFT, if you wanted to test Flex applications, you needed to first compile them specifically for testing. UFT12 includes the UFT Flex Runtime Loader, which you can use to open most of your Flex applications for testing, without having to pre-compile the application. You can use the new Flex tab in the Record and Run Settings dialog box to instruct UFT to open Flex applications at the beginning of a record or run session. In this tab, you specify whether you have prepared the application in advance for testing, or whether UFT should open the application using the Runtime Loader. You can also configure the new Flex Record and Run settings using an automation script
- You can define a shortcut key or key combination that stops the current recording session (for GUI tests only) or run operation, even if UFT is not in focus or is in hidden mode. In the Run Sessionspane in the Options dialog box (Tools > Options > General pane > Run Sessions node, click in the Stop command shortcut key field and then press the required key or key combination on the keyboard. The default key combination is CTRL+ALT+F5.
- The Run Results Deletion tool is now incorporated into the Run Results Viewer. This enables you to automatically delete test results from tests and business process tests stored on ALM without needing to independently connect the Run Results Deletion tool to ALM.
- Testing Extensibility now supports Visual Studio 2010 and Visual Studio 2012. When you run a test that uses a virtualized service, you can now view the service’s details in the run results:
- The name of the service and location of the deployed service
- Deployment status of the service
- The performance and data models used in this test run-time agent mode
- The data simulation and performance simulation accuracy for the virtualized service in this test run.
- A new RunDebug method is available in the Automation Object Model. This method instructs UFT to stop at breakpoints when running a test using automation, whether from ALM or in an automation run.
- Using UFT, you can now run GUI tests as well as API tests that use a virtualized service. This enables you to run tests of your application using a service that would otherwise be inaccessible for test runs.
- UFT provides Business Process Testing from within UFT, using the native UFT user interface. This enables users to create, maintain, debug, and run BPT tests together with GUI and API tests, providing a single, one-stop-shop product for seamless functional testing.
- Business process tests and flows are comprised of business components, which can be used to test specific parts of your application modularity. Business components include keyword GUI components, scripted GUI components, and API components
- If you are familiar with using BPT in ALM, you can use BPT in UFT as follows:
- Add components and flows to your tests and flows by dragging them from the Toolbox pane to the test or flow opened in the document pane
- Set parameter promotion options in the BPT Testing tab of the Options dialog box
- Link and promote parameters in the Component Parameters tab of the Properties pane. Use the other Properties pane tabs to view and modify various test, flow, component, or group details, such as descriptions, fields, and comments
- Manage component iterations in the Data pane
How has it helped my organization?
- Improved our ability to work in different environments and test in different browsers
- Ability to calculate the test run and results using ALM
- Easy to maintain the requirements and completion of its development and testing process
- Improved the level of coding to a higher level
What needs improvement?
With my experience, I couldn’t find any need for improvement.
For how long have I used the solution?
I was using the QTP tool for five years and UFT for three months.
What was my experience with deployment of the solution?
No issues encountered.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
No issues encountered.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
No issues encountered.
How are customer service and technical support?
Customer Service:
I didn’t get a chance to work with customer service.
Technical Support:I didn’t get a chance to work with technical support.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
No previous solution was used.
How was the initial setup?
The initial setup was straightforward.
What about the implementation team?
Implementation was done through a vendor team, and their level of expertise is 9/10.
What other advice do I have?
This tool is good for programming experts.
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Developer at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
The next wave : QTP (I mean UFT) or Selenium?
QTP has ruled the automation tool market in the last decade. There is absolutely no doubt on this. If you have any doubt on this, (I know we are testers, doubting is in our blood. After all, we dont trust developers code as well) gather around 100 manual or automation folks and ask them how many of them have heard about QTP and take the count of who all have raised their hands ( Count it properly, some lazy folks would only raise their hand partially, fearing as if they will be hanged if they raise their hands completely). Now, ask them how many of them have heard about other tools like Watir, Squish, TestComplete, TestPartner, AutomatedQA, AutoIt, MAUI(Shhhhh… This is Microsoft Proprietory tool),Fitnesse, Cucumber, etc. The verdict is out there. QTP has been the King (or queen or Mount Everest or giant or whatever you call it) in the last decade.
I started my career with automation tool development and still continue to do so. Few years back I was bitten by QTP. Started with 9.2, then 9.5 (First from HP, after it acquired Mercury Interactive Systems), 10.0, 11.0 etc. Though there are several bugs in QTP but HP folks have always managed to release a patch in a jiffy. The problem with QTP is that it is ridiculously over priced per seat license. Quite a tough proposition in this cost conscious world.
Here comes Selenium. No other tool has (ever, ever, ever) came closer to QTP than Selenium. Nowadays, there are many folks discussing about Selenium in various forums/ discussion board. What makes Selenium so much in demand? Selenium (Symbol Se) is a chemical substance having an atomic number 34 in the periodic table (If you dont know what is a periodic table, then probably you were not paying attention in your chemistry subject in school) which is used to treat the poison of another chemical substance called Mercury. (Now, you know why the Thoughtworks guys named it Selenium) Btw, ThoughtWorks is one of the best firm. If you are working there, time to pat your back and shout with all your lung power “I am with the best”.
Selenium is free (I still wonder how this folks make money). Selenium is a free addon in firefox. Coding is done in Java language (Trust me Java is a damn powerful language). Gets integrated with other tools like FitNesse.Most developers nowadays use Java as their preferred programming language. Selenium has an edge here.
Having said that UFT 11.5 Rocks !!! I was fortunate to have attended a meeting on UFT 11.5 by HP QTP Development Lead. I was blown away by UFT. A totally revamped product.
Only time will tell, if Selenium can stand up to its name and treat the poison of Mercury.
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Mansoor, this is an interesting article comparing UFT vs Selenium. Let's assume that you had the same exact test case, and had an UFT Automation Engineer and a Selenium Automation Engineer. Can you give any insight on the time to automate the test case with UFT vs Selenium? The reason that I ask is because UFT has a lot of built-in functionality and it is my understanding Selenium is almost all coding. Could you please give your thoughts on this?
QA Expert at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Is it sane to compare Selenium with QTP?
I
have seen many articles which compare Selenium (1 or 2) with QTP (or
other commercial tools). But these articles miss very basic point that
Selenium is a library available in variety of language while QTP has
entire gamut of tools with it. So if you were to really compare QTP with
Selenium then comparison should be based on the library of languages
which is offered either of these tools, which in my opinion Selenium
wins outright over QTP.
My only intention of writing this post is not claim Selenium victory of
QTP but to demonstrate how badly Selenium is compared with QTP at times.
There might be things QTP would be good at doing (I left QTP long ago
hence can not name any) but to disregard Selenium on the factors I
listed herein is highly biased.
- Object spying - Sure, you have QTP recorder which does it for you but don't forget that you can test object locator using Selenium IDE and it is not limited to using only Selenium IDE. Firebug with Firefox can be used for same while Chrome has built in development tool bar to test element locator. In case you don't know you can use $$("cssLocator") to test css locator and $x("xpathLocator") to test xPath in both FF and chrome to test application objects. Can you use QTP to test object locators in FF and Chrome?
- Debugging code - So QTP comes in with built-in editor and Selenium is defeated in this aspect. Is it? Given the variety of languages Selenium can be used with, you have far greater language editor options with Selenium than with QTP. You have umpteen options with editors like Intellij, Eclipse, Visual Studio than the one available with QTP. When I was working with QTP I could not even conveniently rename test methods spanning across multiple files. Such re factoring is child's play with professional editors you use with Selenium
- Recovery Scenarios - This is one of the biggest cheat point of QTP. Add recovery scenarios and tool takes care of working around the update windows. First of all if you add recovery scenario then it slows down the speed of test execution as there would be one listener always looking for such events, which means more recovery scenario and be ready for more slower test execution. Why should you bother about those automatic update windows in your test environment? Should not you proof your test environment against such update windows? If it is windows or FF then disable automatic updates. And best if you can not manage your test environment then out source it to some else like - Sauce Labs or Testing Bot
- Testing non browser applications - Well, when did Selenium claim that it can tests window based applications. Selenium is browser automation framework. Comparing Selenium and QTP on this front is like comparing apples with oranges.
- Great object Repository of QTP - So QTP can store objects in an external location, all you need to do is to update object repo when your object location changes. And then you find that the easiest way to port QTP scripts from one machine to another is to use Descriptive Programming which indeed means that you should do away with your beloved object repository of QTP. Now coming to absence of object repository mechanism in Selenium. Have you heard of properties files or Page Factory and guess what, you you don't have to do away with any thing to be able to port your Selenium tests from one machine to another.
- No built-in Report with Selenium - QTP generates nice test reports and with Selenium - none. Really? When you pick up a language for Selenium you would be using a framework in that language and most probably the framework will provide you the reporting capabilities. For example there is ant task to generate test report in JUnit while TestNG has buit-in reporting mechanism. Google it and you would find similar options in language of your choice.
- QTP and QC integration- You bought QTP for test automation now buy QC for test management. What with Selenium Test Management tools. None. There are indeed options - xStudio is one good option for small Selenium teams looking for test management with out spending any extra money. And their commercial options are cheaper than QC. If you are looking to port your test results to Test Management tool then TestLink might be worth a try. In this case you don't have to pay at all.
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
QTP Analyst (Test Automation Engineer) at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Built-in features for database connectivity and SQL queries for data retrieval are a time saver.
Valuable Features:
- The most valuable thing in my opinion is the ease of moving objects for storage from AUT into the object repository and handling them.
- Also, built-in features for database connectivity and SQL queries for data retrieval are a time saver. This eliminates the need for descriptive programming and writing huge chunks of code for relatively simple tasks.
- Step delay and object sync options are also a very useful feature.
Improvements to My Organization:
- It saves time and manpower. Test development and maintenance are faster and easier thanks to UFT.
- Also, one tool covers several projects developed in different technologies while the approach to test design can remain the same. A relatively small team of trained professionals can cover a wide range of tests.
- Due to UFT’s popup messages for errors and test execution results viewer, it is very simple to analyze the test results and figure out what went wrong, reducing the time needed for defect detection and test updates.
Room for Improvement:
- When it comes to improvements, definitely stability and system requirements are something that could be worked on. In cases of longer tests (in forms of so-called Mega Scripts), there can be a seriously huge usage of virtual memory by UFT that can lead to SystemOutOfMemory exceptions which are showstoppers and a huge annoyance.
- Object recognition can be tricky sometimes. For example, UFT doesn’t recognize the object during test execution, but when you pause the run and click “highlight in app” button in object repository it recognizes the object and you can continue with the run. You still get the “failed” status in run results although it was a UFT error.
Use of Solution:
We use UFT only for our own test automation needs.
Deployment Issues:
We haven't had any issues with deployment.
Stability Issues:
See the stability issues we had above.
Scalability Issues:
We've scaled it for our needs.
Other Advice:
My advice would be to find at least one experienced automation developer who previously worked with UFT to provide practical know-how to others when implementing it for the first time.
Learning the basics is easy and intuitive when you receive a proper training. But using UFT the wrong way can turn out to be cost ineffective. UFT is an expensive tool that can save you a lot of time and effort and provide great value for money if used correctly, but also turn out as ineffective related to value-for-money if used the wrong way.
YouTube tutorials are not the best way of training people for using this tool, the best way is finding people who already have experience to work with it or provide proper training for employees who have never worked with it.
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Aleksandar,
A concise and to the point review. One suggestion for a team member to learn UFT is to have an experienced UFT developer pair-up with the "student" team member and work together developing actual scripts. I have found this to be very effective from my experience.
Regards,
Don
Test Automation Specialist with 1,001-5,000 employees
It gets along well with LoadRunner and ALM, and blends together with the ALM suite. It's rather slow in execution, running modular strips slower than other tools.
Valuable Features
UFT is easy to use for functional testing, so for me it’s very important that it can travel across a large range of technologies. We can use the same tool for all the different kinds of automation that we do.
Improvements to My Organization
We’re already using LoadRunner and ALM. UFT gets along well with these other solutions, blending together with the ALM suite.
Room for Improvement
UFT is rather slow in execution, and that’s something that needs to improve. It runs strips rather slowly as other tools handle the same modular strips much faster.
Stability Issues
It's not always very stable, but that depends on how you implement it in your organization. We put it on a separate server host in Singapore managed by our guys in Bangalore, so they make sure that they’re always available first.
Scalability Issues
Scalability is not that important for UFT since it’s not used by so many people at the same time. For us, there's only a few guys performing performance tests so scalability is not a big issue.
Customer Service and Technical Support
Technical support is quite good, though sometimes it depends on who you’re dealing with. Sometimes you get bad luck and get a guy who doesn't know much about it, is new, or is in training, but most of the time it’s all right.
Initial Setup
It was rather easy and you really can do it yourself.
Other Advice
Ask a good HP expert how you need to do it and they'll tell you how to do it.
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Test Manager at a energy/utilities company with 1,001-5,000 employees
It's the only automation technology that our core application, which is a bit special and resistant to automation, supports.
Valuable Features
The core application that we're using in our company is a bit special and resistant to automation. To properly to automate, it needs a plug-in from the software's vendor. The only technology for automation that is supported is UFT, so we're sort of locked into UFT for our core application.
Improvements to My Organization
UFT is the only technology that enabled us to actually automate our core application.
Room for Improvement
It's fine, but we've had to do workarounds for some things.
Deployment Issues
We've had no issues with deployment.
Stability Issues
For us, we started with version 9 of UFT when it was called QTP, QuickTest Pro. For us it worked, though, like the average software, there are issues, but we always had a good ability to provide work arounds. Regardless, it's been pretty stable.
Scalability Issues
We've had no issues with scalability.
Customer Service and Technical Support
We haven't needed much technical support as we can sort it out ourselves.
Initial Setup
Some parts of it were pretty easy to set up. Most of the issues we had were related to organizational stuff, such as managing licenses, etc.
Other Advice
Make sure you take a good look at your approach, such as whether it's keyword driven automation, etc. Make sure you organize things that you're headed in the right direction because once you implement in a certain way, changing direction may be pretty hard. Determine also how you deal with object repositories, how you deal with sharing information, and how important the reusability of scripts is in your project.
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Jonas,
Thank you for the quick response and detailed answer. It sounds like a very unique situation.
Buyer's Guide
Download our free OpenText UFT One Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros
sharing their opinions.
Updated: November 2024
Product Categories
Functional Testing Tools Mobile App Testing Tools Regression Testing Tools API Testing Tools Test Automation ToolsPopular Comparisons
Tricentis Tosca
BrowserStack
SmartBear TestComplete
Sauce Labs
Selenium HQ
Perfecto
Worksoft Certify
LambdaTest
Ranorex Studio
ReadyAPI
ReadyAPI Test
OpenText UFT Developer
Parasoft SOAtest
Visual Studio Test Professional
Buyer's Guide
Download our free OpenText UFT One Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros
sharing their opinions.
Quick Links
Learn More: Questions:
- Can JIRA provide integration to SAP automation?
- SAP GUI Testing Tool
- Has any user tried using UFT 12.02 with Windows 10?
- UFT 14 vs UFT 12.54
- Can javascript be used as a scripting language for tests in QTP or is it strictly VB?
- Can QTP calculate the number of pixels on a web page?
- Which product supports Cross Browser Testing: UFT Developer or UFT One?
- How does Micro Focus UFT One compare to Tricentis Tosca?
- Is Oracle Application Testing Suite or Micro Focus UFT One better for automating Oracle Fusion Applications?
- Which product do you prefer: Micro Focus UFT One or SmartBear TestComplete?
Can you please elaborate on the part where you stated the script/tool hung? Were there any changes in the UI between the time they ran successfully vs. when it hung?