Tricentis Tosca Reviews

• Complete or partial test automation
• Methodology for reducing the number of test cases needed along with high risk coverage
• Easy way to prioritize requirements
• Ease of test case maintenance
• It can be used by people with no previous programming knowledge
• Agile

Test case automation and ease of test case maintenance through Tosca has reduced the manpower needed for testing, reducing the time needed for testing, and has thus saved money. Management of projects also got a lot easier.

• They could improve scanning of the applications under test
• Useful tips could be improved
• Better and graeter number of examples in manuals
• Reduced cost of licenses

I've used it since March 2014.

Sometimes it is a bit slow when the project is too big and too complex. If there are custom controls being used, sometimes a scanning of the system under test lasts longer than it should.

Medium to high. (always quick to response, but sometimes not that helpful).

Medium to high. (always quick to response, but sometimes not that helpful).

We previously used HP Application Lifecycle Management for manual testing. We chose to switch to Tosca because of the test case automation and it offers easier management.

Initial setup is pretty much straightforward, but the licenses need to be managed separately the after setup.

We implement it through an in-house team.

ROI is high because of the market that is switching more and more to agile, automated testing, and our company also develops add-on for Tosca.

There are four types of licenses available, and you should use one that best suits your resources and preconditions. Because of expensive licenses, if your company is new to the market, do not start a business using Tosca if you expect slow growth - use cheaper solutions instead, and switch to Tosca once you are overwhelmed with projects and work.

We use the product for web and API automation. 

I am impressed with the product's script test. 

The product needs to improve its pricing. It also needs to improve the infrastructure and DEX agent setup. 

I am using the product for two years. 

The product is stable so far. 

The solution is stable. We had to scale up since our team size had grown. My company has 20 users for the product. 

Support takes time sometimes. At times, we have been able to figure out answers ourselves. Else, we have to rely on the support to create custom modules which takes time. 

Neutral

The product's setup is easy if you have someone experienced on your team. You have to build the infrastructure, database, and a lot of other things. 

I would rate the overall product a seven out of ten. The tool is easy if you are able to find the right set of people. 

The test automation function is independent of the technology used by the drag & drop functionality.

The project that I used this product on did not have a professional test management approach within the test activities they had for their IT systems. That's why they implemented automated testing with Tosca Testsuite, and the manual effort got reduced. At the same time, the replication of test processes was raised by up to 100%. This made the bug analysis for their software development much easier.

There's not much. The release cycles of the vendor are much faster than what companies can implement. Sometimes, out of the box functionalities are reduced to reduce the tools complexity, but then customers do miss some functionalities they had in the past.

I've used it for two years.

Not part of my job, but during the upgrade our IT departmend faced several issues in the installation process of the new version.

Similar issues within the execution of automated tests occurred, but they were solved within the configuration settings and/or with the help of the vendor.

No issues encountered.

Best I have ever seen.

Best I have ever seen.

Not as part of this project, but I used HP Quality Center as a test tool before. I found it much easier to learn as Tosca Testsuite has been devleoped for users with a very good and intuitive user interface.

The main installation was already done when I started. The setup of work areas, and multi-user workspaces is very easy and straightforward. Different options are described very well in the user manual.

Not sure, but I think the basic installation was done by a vendor team.

It's hard to calculate because there is no base available to compare with. However, test automation and management setup can be done very fast, and it has lower real costs when compared to doing a manual test execution for three or four times.

The department did an evaluation between HP Quality Center and TOSCA before my assignment started. The main reasons for choosing Tosca Testsuite was its easier usability as well as lower costs.

Check the efforts of your manual testing per application every year, and then decide on what, and how, to automate. Usually there should be an ROI at the latest, after using Tosca Testsuite for two years.

• Test case design
• Shows results in the requirements section
• Manual test cases
• Automation

Test automation – how you can record the module. It’s already easier to record than it was, but there is still room for improvement.

UI has gotten better but could still be improved.

There are some keyword shortcuts in test case design and in general that could be introduced. Sometimes everything is too big – it’s hard to describe.

I've used it for four years.

Not so far because we only started automating now. So far we have not tried to move the existing project to a new version- we just started.

With the license stability, we have had a lot of issues. There were many interruptions to the connection and took two-three weeks and have installed the license ourselves.

We just started – it should be ok.

Quite good – they were trying to solve the problem.

It was ok. I have seen better. They tried to find solutions quickly so that is a plus, and they always called back when there was an appointment or said they would call back.

No previous version was used.

Straightforward – only problem was with the license server.

We looked at Ranorex and Eggplant. We decided to go with Testsuite because you can integrate manual test cases and you can see the reports in a nice way and see how the test case is going in the requirement section.

Tosca can work with a wide range of technological solutions. So Tosca is not just a replacement for open-source products. It's integrated with different technologies, desktop applications, package solutions like SAP, and mobile applications.

Right now, I can't think of any areas where Tosca can improve because we are not yet that experienced with delivering services based on Tosca.

I've been using Tosca for nearly three years.

We haven't implemented Tosca at a large enough scale to really comment on that. 

We haven't had any major problems with the product, but when we've had issues, Tricentis support has been generally responsive.

The implementation process is manageable and easy enough. It's an example of a good implementation approach.

Primarily I'm dealing with customers looking for a cheap solution, and they are willing to try open-source automation solutions. So from this perspective, the price of Tosca is not as competitive. And these alternatives are on the radar of larger companies that are investing in the delivery of their products. So Tosca is not penetrating the market as much because of the license prices.

I would rate Tosca eight out of 10. The only disadvantage is the high price. Still, I would say it's worth trying because the barrier is low to implement automation, and it works with a broad scope of technologies and applications.

Tosca has made the non-programming engineers job easy. The concept is unique but indeed the tool is very powerful in analyzing the functional aspects of both standalone and browser applications. I had a very wonderful experience with Tosca.

We have one application based on tax calculations and the transactions are calculated based on an Excel formula. We have developed implementations regarding how to implement or automate the application, but with Tosca the predefined modules from the TBOX engine and standard engine made our job to calculate the transactions easier.

Its unique way of test data maintenance re-usability of test cases is fantastic. Also, the support agents from the portal always respond to queries in less than 10 secs, which is very well appreciated!!

I am very happy using the product and also whenever I have asked for remote sessions, the agents always agreed.

I would request that they develop some modules on the classic engine.

I have been using it for more than a year now.

I have never encountered any deployment issues. Tosca is very intelligent in the way they handle the issues.

Tosca is efficient.

I would rate customer service 10/10.

Technical support is 10/10.

I am new to automation and Tosca is my first product.

Intitial setup is straightforward

A vendor team implemented it and they were 9/10.

We have achieved complete ROI.

We were advised to use QTP, but because we are new to programming, Tosca was the best for us to adopt.

We've found TBox to be valuable for scanning applications and automating test cases. In newest version, time of scanning the application has been reduced immensely. Also, there is a lot of ways to identify controls that doesn't have unique IDs, and that process is more stable than before.

TOSCA is quite organized by itself, so it helps us do our job more efficient and quicker.

The ability to create more complex TestCases with "If" and "While" loops (now it provides IF, DO and WHILE statements, but they can't really be implemented the way we are used to use those loops).

I've used the latest version for about three to four months, though TOSCA in general for more than a year-and-a-half.

N/A

Some issues with stability, but those are minor errors. Some errors happen without obvious reasons, or they're not obvious to me yet.

N/A

N/A

Generally, the support is good, but they give too many generic answers. Sometimes the problem is more direct and it requires deeper and longer thinking. That could be a bit improved.

Something in the middle. It's not really for somebody who is not passionate about testing. It's great for somebody who thinks about all the aspects of the TestCase.

Great tool for testing, but only when used by an educated tester or by somebody who's gone through the whole course and had at least a little bit of practice. It's worth it.

We are using it for end-to-end automation. The performance is good. It's just that it doesn't support applications on the Mac. But overall it is good.

Helps decrease execution time.

We have multiple applications, and it supports parallel execution. It has mobile automation.

Making it more stable would be good because we get around 90% stability. It would be great if it were more stable.

It is scalable.

We do use it but it was better a year ago. Now, the turnaround time takes a little more time.

The upgrade I was involved in was complex. We had some issues with it.

My most important criteria when selecting a vendor are its technology and is it stable enough.