Tricentis Tosca Reviews

We have been using this solution in my organization. There are several clients who have come back to us asking for different automation tools and our views on which automation tools can be used in their respective projects.

We have been evaluating for these clients. The evaluations we were doing, was for our client but done within the organization only.

The most valuable feature is the UI.

We work primarily on evaluating the UI. We evaluated Tosca BI and a bit for Tosca APIs and think they are very useful.

The reporting is really nice. There are many clients who ask for a feature with any automation tool that can generate good reports for them. There is only one such tool that facilitates that option, which is Tosca.

The volume for the BI testing is limited. If they could provide a few options to use it, using Tosca only, that could be a great thing because there are a lot of clients who do not actually want to go for the BI, but then they do have the database testing.

I know that Tosca provides the feature but it's very minuscule.

The UI does not have the option of automating the scroll bars. There are workarounds for that but for example, if I open two tabs that have the same page then it will give me another difficulty in scanning those options. 

In the next release, including this in Tricentis would be great.

I have been acquainted with this solution for approximately eight months.

So far, what we have used has been stable.

I have read some reviews where they have expressed that they are not happy with the stability, but so far, I have not faced any such issues.

The scalability is good. If I had to rate it out of five, I would say that it would be a three-point five to four.

We have anywhere from 500 to 750 people who are using this solution in our organization.

Technical support is good. Their turnaround time is usually within 24 to 48 hours, but normally we have a response within 24 hours.

Previously, we did not work with any other solution.

We have always worked with the demo licenses, which included support from the Tricentis teams. They have always been able to set up the licensing.

I would say that it is not that straightforward.

On average, it did not take more than two to three hours if you know the process properly. To get it started, it will require at least six hours.

The disadvantage is that it is very expensive.

I would like to see better costing packs. There are several features but USD $11,000 for one license is expensive. If it had more interaction and if the license cost was a little less it would be better and rate higher.

The recommendation of this solution depends from client to client and what their requirements would be, the parameters, and what is important to them. 

If the client wants good support and at the same time they want to have a good database included with the Automation Testing Suite, and is ready to spend the money, then we would definitely suggest Tricenta Tosca as a good option.

Again, it is dependant on the client's requirements and what they would want in an automation tool.

If you have Linux or Mac machines, then it gets very difficult to implement Tosca. I would suggest using it. 

For testing, they would want to migrate miscellaneous scripts and use Tosca for those migrations. But, it's very difficult. 

My suggestion would be to go with the Tricentis Suites and the Selenium Automation Suites.

From a positive perspective, I would want people to use the reporting from Tosca. They have very good reporting. The reporting feature is very user-friendly and very easy to use.

I would rate Tricenta Tosca an eight out of ten.

Tosca is a good tool. The product enables codeless automation. If we need to write codes, it will take some time. With Tosca, we can scan things within a second, add the test, and run the script. We can track automation coverage with the help of requirements and coverage features. It is an effective feature. Reusable and library are key features of the product. Once we create the test cases with the help of the library and Reusable, we can call it repeatedly wherever we go.

I am facing issues integrating the tool with the qTest server. It is the only problem I have been facing for a long time. I am not able to troubleshoot the issue. It is quite difficult to integrate the solution with other tools.

I have been using the solution for one year and six months.

The tool is stable.

The tool is scalable. We have 10 to 15 users.

The support is good.

Positive

We can easily install the product if we have the license. The deployment takes two to three weeks. We need one to two people for the deployment.

The tool is quite expensive.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

Tricentis Tosca is used to test our in-house products. We have developers for Google and other web applications for our internal use, but that product is developed by outsourced developers, that needs to be tested.

The most valuable feature is being able to create a test case by recording some scenarios and then leasing that task case to other scenarios.

We only use the UI for testing purposes, so all other features are unusable to us.

The document object model or some aspects of it has a bit of a learning curve.

I have been working with Tricentis Tosca for one year.

We use the latest version.

I don't have any issues with the stability of Tricentis Tosca.

Because my organization or team only has one or two testers, we don't need to think about scalability. As a result, that product does not need to be scalable in my environment.

My experience with the Tricentis website support was good.

I have experience with Selenium HQ and Parasoft.

We conducted a SOAtest using Parasoft. Tricentis Tosca is different and better, because it has a reusable model, whereas the others do not.

The initial setup requires some learning time. In my experience, we have testers who have no development experience, so we need to educate them on the development side. I'm referring to the ID in the document object model or some aspects of it. After that, we'll be able to use it. In my experience, the learning curve was the most difficult obstacle.

It took approximately three months to complete the deployment.

This solution is maintained by two people, the same two who use it.

I was able to learn the installation process myself.

Licensing fees are paid on a yearly basis.

I would recommend this solution to others, but in our country, I believe the importance of testing is currently ignored or underestimated. It is not popular in our country at this moment but I will recommend this tool.

We are partners with Tricentis.

I would rate Tricentis Tosca an eight out of ten.

• Dynamic test case creation: Tosca lets you create automated test cases in no time. You can also convert your manual test cases into automated in a matter of seconds.
• Optimize, manage and automate: It lets you jot down your requirements, design test cases, automate and analyse your test results within one GUI.
• Scriptless automation:Testers can test without worrying about writing code.
• Supports both GUI as well as non-UI testing.
• Test case design: Really lets you think about your test approach and strategy, It lets you automatically generate all the possible (and required) permutations and combinations of the functionality to be tested.

We had this huge customer application (Java based) which needed to be tested end to end. Tosca let us execute around 400 test cases overnight. Hence, it saved a lot of time and brought value for our - and the vendor's :) - esteemed client.

Tricentis has vast and helpful documentation, including the Tosca manuals, along with a detailed description of each section that also contains various tips and techniques. Along with this documentation Tricentis has provided some videos, which are really helpful and help us understand the concept very quickly (and if we want to go into detail, then we can always refer to the detailed manual later).

It would be great if there are more video tutorials on the vendor's support website, at least for commonly used functionalities.

It's been over five years now; have been using it since version 7.6.

I have not encountered any deployment issues in my project.

I have not yet encountered any stability issues.

Customer service is excellent.

Technical support is excellent.

The vendors' videos and webinars are of great help, so I would like them to keep coming up with more.

Tosca Continuous Integration (Tosca CI) - today's fast pace agile environment needs fast feedback. Working along with the development team and being able to test as soon as the code is available; gives the organisation an edge!

Tosca Continuous Integration allows you to exactly achieve that.

We have implemented Tosca CI, it allows us to test as soon as the code is deployed into the lower environment. Automated sanity, smoke tests have been configured to run every time there is a code deployment. The sanity/smoke tests are triggered automatically from a build server. After the test finishes, a Junit result file is generated and fed back to the build server.

This saves us significant amount of time by avoiding additional co-ordination/follow-ups required for sanity/smoke test. 

The Junit result file gets overwritten each time the build is triggered from Jenkins or Bamboo. It would be nice to have the result XML files stored.

Only minor issues.

The connection between the CI client and remote machine dropped off when certain standard Tosca modules were used in the test cases.

Example: TC Send Key, TC Name To Buffer

No issues so far.

Customer service is reasonably good.

There were a few hiccups on the way with the configuration files. 

Business dynamic steering and table steering.

For example, you can make templates and share them with storage elements. We use it in our main, regressive, HTML, and web-case tests.

At the moment, none. In the latest version I don’t see much room for improvement.

I've used it for six years.

In the past there were.

The product is stable; no problems with stability features.

We had in the past, but those are gone in the latest versions. In the beginning there were problems with scaling up, but those are gone as well.

We had QA Windrunner, which was running out of its maintenance lifecycle. Also, the product wasn’t very good as it caused problems, was only a tool for testing automation, and we needed a tool that could be used for several purposes like reporting, putting in requests, and data storage. Testsuite accomplishes what a lot of different tools did before. Now, three or so tools are no longer needed, and our testing is all unified in TOSCA.

It's very good.

It's very good.

It was implemented through a vendor team – our team members had done a TOSCA certification so they worked together.

The best way to look into the solution, you have to experience things for yourself. Have technical support from the beginning so that you have guidance early on.

We use Tosca to automate progressive and regressive tests. About 60 people in my company are currently using it.

What I find valuable is that Tricentis is always refining the test methodology. They listen to feedback from the analysts about what the testing tool should do, and then Tricentis always implements it. So all the necessary testing functions are already implemented in their tools. So whenever there is some new need for a testing capability, I can be sure that Tricentis will implement it into the Tosca Test Suite quickly, and we can use it.

Tosca's reporting features could be better. Tricentis had a reporting tool called Analytics, but it didn't function properly after they reworked it. After that, they tried a new approach with key-tracing, and that didn't work. So they don't have a good reporting solution currently, and I hope they add one soon. 

I've been using Tricentis Tosca for around 16 years.

Tosca's stability is good. However, when we upgrade, sometimes we find some defects or problems. These are usually fixed within days or two weeks if there are bigger issues. And this is once per year, usually without any bigger issues. The only other thing that sometimes causes problems is when the time path and some repositories are not on hand. Also, if the infrastructure or the network is not stable, you can have problems with the application. But, of course, that's not something the application can really prevent, like if the internet connection breaks or something like that. Especially now that almost all of us are working remotely. So you can have some defects on the network that causes some problems in the application as well.

Before, we also used Tosca for manual testing. We had, I think, 400 to 800 main users — not at the same time — but we had a lot of users then. If you know the size of your repository, then it's easy to size the server accordingly. Also, when you know your requirements, you should make sure that the infrastructure meets the requirements, then it's easier. 

The quality of Tricentis support really depends on the type of issue. When it's important, I go through the surveys, account manager quizzes, and so on. Tricentis handles the important issues quickly. And if we have smaller problems, it's usually routed to India, so we get a lot of basic questions back, and I don't like that process much. But, when it's important, we're immediately connected to the right people and get quick solutions.

Setting up Tosca is quite straightforward. The main issue is setting up your infrastructure, the network port, and all those things upfront. But when this is fine, then the installation is uncomplicated. Then, we update once a year, and it takes a few hours.

We have some integrators and consultants working for us, and we always have on-demand vendor support if something is not working. They resolve issues quickly. The vendor handles software maintenance. Our installation and maintenance can be partially done by a Tricentis consultant who works for our team. But before, it was an in-house guy. That guy left, so we hired an external consultant to do the same functions as the in-house staffer. So we have someone in the organization who is doing that. Before, it was internal and not external, but he is working basically like an internal for us.

I'm not sure if I'm at liberty to talk about the pricing, but it has some significant costs. For example, you have to pay a license and maintenance fee. Then the rest of the terms are negotiable. We have to consider what we need and what benefit we get from it. You can then make a business case and see how the licensing fits best since they have different licensing models. You have to find the right model of licensing for you and then negotiate a reasonable price. So we always make a business case, and if the business case is okay, the licensing price is also okay. It provides value for the money. It's a stable product with a lot of functionality. And as I said before, it keeps pace with all the new trends that the analysts suggest, so it's worth the money

I rate Tosca nine out of 10. So if you are considering this solution, I recommend that you make sure your team is good and stable in test definition. Also, you should build up your organization's competence in test automation. That way, you can get the most out of the tool and utilize its capabilities to benefit your organization. But there are challenges with a large organization internally. For example, we first had a central team for test automation. Then we moved to HL and de-centralized our test automation team. Unfortunately, that didn't work so well since it requires some specialized knowledge that you need to learn and to practice. So now we are trying to move again to centralized test automation and get more value for the business.

This solution allows you to create an entire automated framework where it allows you to easily manage everything in one place.

It's given us the ability to do automated tests which has made some things a lot quicker.

A part of our problem is that we don’t necessarily have staff 100% dedicated to it, so that's a problem in our area. We should have had more done and taken on some huge projects, so it’s more that we haven’t had the time to use it to the greatest extent possible.

Our stability problems mentioned below notwithstanding, I am sure the new release will address everything that we need. We are going to convert to the new version and we have to address a problem with one of our apps first. We recently went through some training, our staff was excited about that and being able to see the new version was great.

The biggest roadblock for us in getting the newest version right now is accommodation of our application. The current version makes our lives easier, but we're still holding off on some testing until the accommodation issues has been resolved.

I've used it for a year and a half.

We've had no issues with deployment.

I think the version we're using is fairly stable, but I think the new version is not so stable, and that’s what's stopping us from moving over to it. We're having application problems, but once that's resolved, we'll move over to the new version.

It's scaled for our needs so far.

Overall, I'd say that technical support is good. When I have had interaction or problems, I let them know and they provide me with get instant feedback. I have been happy with that.

We didn't use a previous solution, but I've personally worked with other tools. Testsuite is versatile, and that was the big thing about choosing it. We're using Power Builder, which Testsuite can support, along with other applications. So it's great having one tool instead of many.

I think it’s important to get the training that is provided and really make sure you get hands-on time with the product. That’s our problem -- we haven’t been able to dedicate ourselves to it. If we had the time to stay with it and learn it then we could move forward.