ReadyAPI Test Reviews

• Data driving
• Easy to use

It has enabled a more thorough testing of our API layer.

There are a lot of bugs and it can sometimes be 'quirky.'

We have been using the solution for a year.

We had a stability issue but it is related to our machines only having 4 GB RAM.

We have not encountered any scalability issues.

The technical support is very good. Normally our issues are fixed within three months or if they are severe then by the next maintenance release.

I am not aware of any previous solutions.

Setup was easy. You just run the installer and set up your license.

The product is very good value but be prepared for some issues which you will have to work around.

We evaluated SoapUI, SOATest, UFT.

For the money this is a great tool.

• Prepared different kinds of testSteps
• It's easy to add assertions in the Pro version
• Groovy scripting
• Event handlers

Used for backend functional testing.

• Improve bug fixing
• Stability
• Memory consumption
• Exclude test results out of projects (xml file)
• Improve composite project mode (tried version 1.2,1.3 but after short time refused)

I've used it for more than three years starting with SoapUI Pro version 4.6.x. SoapUI NG from beginning after renamed to Ready API and be part of it.

8/10 - the answer for reported bug was a known issue and a fix will be a part of future releases, no time scale given. The bugs are are in many releases.

I have not used other solutions for back and testing personally. Comparing to robot framework SoapUI had more pros than robot framework.

Initial set-up of program is straightforward, preparing own project with dynamic path e.g. JDBC connection or endpoint is more complex.

The product is a good solution for functional back end testing, but the price should be lower due to already mentioned problems, bugs. Use other product framework for small solutions, due to price/bugs. The advantage is that the product is handy for testers, user friendly; ability to use load, security tests or create mocks.

I like the features for SOAP, REST and JDBC. I also like the easy way to do assertions.

The tests are running fast and often which means that we get feedback about the tests very quick and then are able to evaluate the test results.

It would be nice if you could organize the tests in more levels. Would like to add my own error message when using the Message Content Assertion (this is for the PRO version). This could be useful when running the tests from Jenkins.

I have been using various versions since 2007.

Sometimes you have to reload the project when you are moving/reorganizing tests in a project.

Quick response from the support and forum.

We chose this product because it is easy to use and have many functions that supports ours needs for example SOAP, REST and JDBC requests.

Very easy to setup and use.

I have been using it as a consultant and in-house. It's easy to do if you follow the on-line instructions

The tool supports the way we want to automate or tests. That means all from creating tests and data to assertions and finally cleaning the data. The test are also running in a CI Jenkins environment. The pricing is okey for PRO version but the price is getting higher all the time. There are also a free version.

I think this is a very easy tool to use for automated tests to run in a CI environment. You don’t have to be a “hardcore” programmer to use the tool but to get the best from it you should have some interest in programming/scripting.

Functional and load testing of the APIs we've developed internally and the APIs we've consumed from external parties.

It helped us to make API mockups much faster, in addition to the functional and regression testing.

API mockups, functional testing, and load testing. API mockups is a feature that quickly allowed us to have a working API mockup interface during the initial API discussion meetings.

The UI should be improved a little. 

It would be great to integrate the graphing module for load testing, so that we could analyze the timings of the responses and how that changes over time with changes in the API implementation logic.

I primarily use Soap UI to test XML/JSON requests and responses for APIs hosted by us and our vendors. Also, SoapUI is easy to use since all my requests are saved in a single location so I can export and share them with my team.

It helps me in speeding up testing process as all requests are saved and can be retrieved from a single location.

The application has to be restarted after being used for an hour or so as it stops working after that.

We encountered no issues with deployment.

With a big response size, the application hangs.

We've encountered no issues with scaling it.

It's easy to use and should not require any training.

It gives us the ability to quickly test web services.

It's sped up testing as we move towards a TDD environment.

In the LoadUI companion the scripts are not user friendly, and it also has a slow startup time.

We've been using it since 2014.

There were no issues with deployment.

There were no issues with the stability.

There were no issues with the scalability.

I am sure it's good but I have not had the need to contact customer service.

We also use Selenium/JMeter/Gomez etc. SoapUI is just one of the tools that I use.

The ability to analyse and simulate web services are clearly the main value.

Testing web services manually, speeds up things.

A better integration with IDE would be nice, but the main issue here is do not break what works well, as so many others have done.

I've used it for four years on and off.

The only problem is integration.

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered.

It's OK, I've not used it much.

Tcpdump and others like that, no one had the ability to work in a structured way with webservices like SoapUI.

Straghtforward, when it works! Impossible when it does not.

I am never going to buy SoapUI, far to expensive. But I suppose the customers SoapUI are targeting do not give a damn about the price!

Ttry it, you may like it and you will know soon enough. Certainly worth the effort.