OpenText UFT One Reviews, Competitors and Pricing

Analyst Programmer at a university with 1,001-5,000 employees

Dec 5, 2015

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?

It's allowed us to perform functional testing (to verify a specific action or function of code) for each product update.

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

January 2025

Free Report: OpenText UFT One Reviews and More

Learn what your peers think about OpenText UFT One. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: January 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

831,265 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.

it_user251862

Automation Engineer at HealthNow

Jun 28, 2015

Download

Manual testing time has been reduced. The IDE is very user friendly.

What is most valuable?

The IDE is very user friendly.

How has it helped my organization?

There's less manual testing time, so we are able to quickly resolve any IT issues.

What needs improvement?

In future versions, I would like to see the ability to turn off the auto-complete, or at least have this working properly as it doesn’t seem to be doing so now. Also, object identification isn’t always 100% reliable, and the development environment kind of gets in the way. It seems as if it’s inflated and gets in the way of just writing code.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It’s in the middle and not always 100% reliable.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

We've had the same amount of licenses for years now, so we're not exposed to scaling.

How are customer service and technical support?

We use a third-party vendor, and they are very helpful. Any help we’ve ever needed is covered.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

It was already in place when I joined and has always been this solution.

How was the initial setup?

I don’t know, but I think it was fairly straightforward.

What other advice do I have?

Support and reliability are my most important criteria when selecting a solution. Also, I would evaluate its compatibility, and HP seems to be comfortable in not having too much competition in this realm.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.

Don IngersonQA Automation Engineer at Global Fortune 500 Company

Report as inappropriate

Mar 4, 2016

Robert, thank you for the reply. I do know that QC/ALM has version control, yet I have seen companies use another tool for version control eventhough they had QC/ALM.

Free Report: OpenText UFT One Reviews and More

Learn what your peers think about OpenText UFT One. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: January 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

831,265 professionals have used our research since 2012.

it_user69069

QA Expert at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees

Nov 11, 2013

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.

reviewer1262124

Test Solution Architect at a tech services company with 51-200 employees

Oct 19, 2020

Download

Poorly designed, runs slow, and makes test automation really difficult

Pros and Cons

"The initial setup is relatively easy."

"The overall design needs an entire overhaul. We prefer software designed to ensure the package isn't too loaded."

What is our primary use case?

We primarily use the solution for any test completion intended for the system.

How has it helped my organization?

I don't really see a way it has improved our organization. I don't like this tool and I don't think that it's a successful example for automation. It's because of the tool's limitations that make the automation of a project difficult to execute successfully.

What is most valuable?

The solution is the company's product of choice. We disagree a bit in that regard.

The initial setup is relatively easy.

What needs improvement?

The solution makes test automation really difficult to maintain. The design of the test framework isn't ideal. They should work to improve it.

The concept is really old. It needs to be integrated with EMM, due to the fact that, obviously, EMM is the one to manage your test. It's almost difficult to manage test automation as a project. It's good for video testing, however, it's not good for a project.

The overall design needs an entire overhaul. We prefer software designed to ensure the package isn't too loaded.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using the solution for three years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The solution is stable. However, that said, it's also slow.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The scalability is pretty good. If an organization needs to expand, it should have no trouble doing so.

Our particular projects have more than 50 people on them. Mostly they are from the IT automation team.

How are customer service and technical support?

I didn't really ask for technical support in the past. We didn't really use much of the features, therefore we didn't have technical issues with that tool. I can't speak to their general responsiveness having never spoken with them directly.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

I have never used a different solution. I merely use this solution as it is my company's preferred product.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is not complex. It's quite straightforward.

What other advice do I have?

We're just customers. We don't have any business relationship with Micro Focus.

Personally, the solution doesn't meet my expectations. The design is really old. It's possible we'll be talking about changing soon. I'm not sure if it will happen, however, I would prefer to try something new.

A person with no programming background might really like this solution. I, however, do not. On a scale from one to ten, I'd rate it at a five. I have a technical background and I don't really like using this tool. It's better for someone with less programming experience.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.

Don IngersonQA Automation Engineer at Global Fortune 500 Company

Report as inappropriate

May 5, 2021

1) What do you mean by tool’s limitations?

2) Can you please elaborate on what video testing is?

Also, there several different frameworks that can be used with UFT. I am not clear about the context of how you are using the word framework. Can you please elaborate?

it_user166281

Test Automation Specialist with 1,001-5,000 employees

Jan 7, 2016

Download

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.

it_user69807

Developer at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees

Nov 18, 2013

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.

Don IngersonQA Automation Engineer at Global Fortune 500 Company

Report as inappropriate

Jan 9, 2017

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?

it_user357483

QTP Analyst (Test Automation Engineer) at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees

Jan 25, 2016

Download

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.

Don IngersonQA Automation Engineer at Global Fortune 500 Company

Report as inappropriate

Sep 4, 2017

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

gagneet

Continuous Delivery Lead at SAI Global

Feb 15, 2017

Well supported and lots of resources available but has high deployment costs

Advantages:

Well supported and lots of resources available who have certifications, but mostly used in Financial Institutions. Integrated add-on for Flex, Web Services, Silverlight, and Web HTML. Framework issues can be easily taken care of with Odin AXE framework, which uses XML and simple interface. Lots of resources are available who can work on and use QTP.

Disadvantages:

Ability to recognize complex UI and dynamic content hinders the tool. Mostly used in Data-driven web testing, which makes use of Excel sheets; easy for the user to use, but may cause issues in maintainability. Windows System only focused. Not suitable for Unix-Clones and Mac OS. High deployment costs, and later will incur maintenance costs also, as each programmer has a different coding style and the new user has to learn and then work on it. Learning curve for it is not steep, as users are available who know VBA and VB Script.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.