OpenText UFT One Reviews

UFT provides us with solid automation for our test cases.

Its ease of use means we've been able to ramp up non-technical users and have them understand how to do general debugging very easily.

Tighter integration between ALM and UFT, especially from a reporting perspective, for automation reporting. There's good integration in my opinion, but it just needs to be a little more rock solid.

We've been using it for around three and a half years.

For the most part UFT has been pretty good. Getting it to interact with ALM nicely has been a challenge for us sometimes.

It's been able to scale to our needs.

Good, sometimes a little slow, but overall pretty good.

We didn't have any other solution in place, and needed to have a much better solution than doing testing with Excel files.

It's straightforward.

HPE was one of the very few vendors that we actually had on the list. We went with HPE because my boss actually was very familiar with the product, and felt it fits our organizations needs extremely well.

Give it a shot, if you take the time to invest in it, it works.

The most valuable feature to me are the high-end automation frameworks -- linear, hybrid, data-driven, keyword-driven, BPT, and functional decomposition.

It works with both desktop and web-based applications.

It also provides us with service testing, API testing, GUI testing and business process testing.

It needs better compatibility with Chrome and Safari, which would lead to this being a better product.

I've used it for six years.

I had no issues with deployment.

I've had no stability issues.

We've scaled without issue.

Customer service is excellent.

Technical support is excellent.

We didn't use a previous solution.

The installation process of this software is very well organized. Here, all the prerequisites/supporting software are part of setup and it automatically configures your system for the best use during the installation. If in one or more parameters are missing the latest updates, it performs those updates automatically.

We did it in-house, and I was a part of this team. You need to make sure to demonstrate to team members the proper tools for installation so they can follow the various concepts and then arrange for proper training to be given to all users for the best use of it. I believe that a well-trained person/team can solve issues with HP UFT by themselves.

It's fast, reliable, and accurate, and should provide ROI.

I am aware of other tools on the market, but I found HP UFT best suited to my needs. We, therefore, adopted it.

If one is looking for a software testing tool for functional parameters with an automation approach, they can go for it without any more thinking and discussion. Where there are a few up and coming open source solutions, they have limitations that HP UFT doesn't have.

The most valuable features are the API testing, the integration with DevOps and accessibility to people without a lot of technical skill.

We can move beyond manual testing without having to go through a whole transformation of an application.

I would like to see more integration with LeanFT and use UFT for continuous integration. It's still a closed product. There's still a reasonably large amount that it can do in order to get better.

Stability is good.

Scalability is good. I never have seen an issue with the scalability.

When choosing a vendor, find someone who understands your problems. Build a good relationship. Make sure you can influence the product road map. Look at it amongst other tools in the tool chain. Look at LeanFT as well.

The features I've found most valuable are--

• API
• GUI

We have performed 3500 test case automations, and we are able to execute them in just five days. If we were to do this manually, it would take 30 days.

Cross-browser testing feature should be improved.

They should also develop a generic framework so everyone can use it who purchases it.

Also, the browser shrinks while running GUI test cases, and UFT hangs while debugging.

I've been using it for a year.

HP UFT consumes too much RAM, so the system gets hung.

It's 90%.

Initially, we started doing automation using Selenium, but we could not succeed with it, so we migrated from Selenium to HP UFT. We now have a successful solution.

We faced a lot of problems during implementations, such as objection identification and cross-browser functionalities.

We implemented with our in-house team.

The ROI is good.

The cost of the HP UFT license is more.

The GUI automation, mobile testing, UFT, and the application lifecycle management features are the most valuable for my projects.

This product has increased productivity and quality of testing. It has also reduced manual efforts for performing Regression and Sanity for every new build.

There is also better evaluation and analysis of defects using UFT integrated with ALM.

I would like to see them remove the shortcoming of working with .NET applications, as there is not much support provided for automating applications developed on .NET.

I would also like to see HP increase the trial period for UFT so that people can learn it by giving them more time. They can then practice more and more to increase their knowledge.

Finally, by providing mobile add-in and an API testing add-in to the trial version, they can help people to grow in this field in a better way.

I have used this for more than five years.

I have faced some issues while running automation scripts. Sometimes loop variable named as “i” do not actually perform its functionality. By changing the variable name the purpose is resolved. The stability of test scripts running is not very good when we change the names of actions.

9/10 - the team provides solutions as soon as possible through email.

9/10 - the team provides solutions as soon as possible through email.

I was using Selenium with Java to do automation, but as Selenium could not help me do Windows based application automation, I switched to UFT as a new solution.

The initial step for me was straightforward as I have good technical skills. Therefore, it was easy for me to learn VB scripting and start preparing frameworks for UFT.

I was working in a service-based company as an automation developer. I have implemented all types of frameworks in the banking sector on which I was working.

The return on investment for any company buying this product license is 100 percent, as businesses with clients increase productivity when manual tasks becomes faster and efficient by automating them with this tool.

Once the license is purchased, this tool can be used for automating many applications, and can be used by any automation developer working in an organization that has purchased this licensed tool.

This product can be used for automation of websites, windows application, mobile testing and API (Application Programming Interface) test automation.

People who wanted to reduce their efforts for repetitive task can use this product to automate manual tests. This helps increase the reliability and quality of testing.

It's great to be able to go from one company to another and each one uses UFT similarly. It's also extremely versatile, in that you can pretty much use it with any type of application.

It allows us to automate hundreds of test cases that would normally have to be manually tested. The tests are also extremely reliable so it saves a lot of time on analysis. That's really the first and foremost benefit for us. We were doing quarterly releases as well as maintenance releases, which is quite a lot. So this solution has saved us a lot of effort and expense.

The knowledge base for getting started isn't terribly deep, so it requires you to have a bit of programming ability to pick it up and use it.

It's deployed without any issues for us.

It's fairly stable, but the problem is that it's not always updated and current. When something new comes up, it takes HP a long time to support it.

Scalability depends on the user. UFT is basically a sandbox and will be as flexible as you make it. So scalability can be high, but there are things that work against it. You're bound by the licensing structure, so in order to get bigger benefits, you have to have multiple copies. If you want to fun multiple simultaneous tests, you have to have the licensing to do that, and that costs a ton of money.

A lot of people are moving away from the big intertools. So people look at products all the time, and every time the budget comes up or every time they tell me to cut expenses or every time they get frustrated with it, a lot of the small-time tools and open-source tools get attention. So I've been evaluating those.

If you're an HP shop, you're probably going to go out and buy it. But I don't think new customers will sign on to replace, for example, Selenium. There are plenty of open-source options, and people who know how to implement UFT already know how to implement open-source codes. So I think that people who are using open source will stick with open source, and people who have significant investment inHP will stick with HP.

For HPE UFT, you can automate your testing for a lot of different platforms. It's not only web-based but also for backend applications; you can also do the integration of the applications.

For test automation, it helps to speed up the testing and to speed up the software delivery, especially for HPE UFT because you have lots of test automation tools. Also, if I compare HPE UFT with the HPE QTP solution, then HPE UFT is more user-friendly in its use. You still have to program it, but you don't have to program it all of the time; so for a user who isn't used to working with code, he can do other things in HPE UFT.

I'm really looking forward to seeing the HPE StormRunner Functional. If it's possible to do it in a good way from the cloud, and you don't have to install it. I've seen that working for the HR manager and ALM solutions, so it would be very helpful. You have to deal with issues such as the firewall and how can the tool talk with the application, i.e., if the application is on a company network and so on. That, of course, is important to figure out.

I have used HPE Unified Functional Testing (UFT) for one and a half years, whereas the HPE QuickTest Professional (QTP) for a couple more years before that.

We have to download it, then install it on our own machines and the machines sometimes aren't stable; since we have PDIs, also the UFT isn't stable and I don't know yet where the connection is.

Scalability is a little difficult because you need to have the machines and then, have to install it. It is less scalable than the other products. For example, the HR manager just takes another workspace in the cloud and then, you work.

I'm more happy with the SaaS support for the HR manager and ALM than with the off-premises support, that I have to so through for UFT. This is because, often, when I have an issue with UFT, I get slow responses and most of the times, it is in regards to the things that I have already Googled and tried to figure out myself. So, it doesn't always help me.

HPE UFT is quite complex to set up.

I, myself mostly, have experience with the HPE tooling and I haven't been in the position where I could decide what tooling to choose. I'm hired because I have this knowledge but I would say usability of the tools, (i.e., how you can use it) is the most important criteria while selecting a vendor