UiPath Test Suite Reviews

We mainly work with web as well as desktop automation. One of our use cases was to raise a ticket from the web portal to the ServiceNow defect management tool, and another was the need to interact with a Linux server through PuTTY. We use UiPath to run different ETL jobs.

When ETL jobs failed, our team used to manually rerun them and log a ticket in ServiceNow. Before restarting a job, they might have to perform some type of operation on it, such as a modification in the data pipeline or the removal of bad data. Or they might have to execute Linux commands. We have automated the restart and execution, and we then send a notification to Outlook as well.

Our team used to require five to six days to complete the entire release or execution cycle. Now, we're able to complete it within just one or one and a half days.

In our current scope, we have to interact with different kinds of applications, including mobile and desktop. UiPath definitely helps us seamlessly interact with these different kinds of applications, and now we can successfully automate any kind of workflow. We can easily automate any kind of complex scenario.

It is definitely easy to build automations with UiPath. Tricentis Tosca and UiPath are both user-friendly.

I would like to see users have the ability to add their own healing features, such as activating object-healing processes. If they could add that feature, that would be beneficial.

It would be something like a rescan. With Selenium, there is a plugin called Healenium, which helps automatically detect changed properties of objects. With one click, it automatically updates the object repository with the changed properties.

I would like UiPath to add that capability. It should be able to rescan a page and report to the user the properties that have been changed, and then allow the user to decide which properties they want to update in the object repository.

We have been using UiPath for about one year.

UiPath is quite a stable product.

UiPath's technical support is quite strong. They could improve on their speed of response.

Positive

Earlier, we used Selenium for automation to interact with web applications only. But we were looking for one tool that can interact with all kinds of applications, such as API-based applications as well as mobile and desktop applications.

I was involved from deployment to implementation and execution. It was a straightforward process. The installation only took one to two hours. I did it myself. There are straightforward instructions and default settings. I just needed to click "next, next."

Using both UiPath and Tosca, we have achieved about 70 to 80 percent ROI. We used to require 10 team members for execution, and now we hardly need two to three resources.

The time-to-value of UiPath, from the initial development of our automation suite until we saw automation working at some level, took about three months.

On the pricing front, Tosca is a bit more costly than UiPath, but UiPath is also pretty expensive compared to other tools. But on the performance front, when it comes to execution, both tools are more mature. And we can automate quickly with both products. Both are keyword-driven, and there is no scripting required. Even with a large application, we can speed up automation.

Both tools are quite capable of integrating with CI/CD tools, as well as test management tools like ALM, JIRA, or a source control repository.

For maintenance, Tosca is better than UiPath. Tosca has a rescan feature, so we can rescan objects. You just need to rescan the entire web page, and it will automatically update the object properties. That way, there is no need to manually update them. We definitely save time there. It's on the rescan front that UiPath lags compared to Tosca.

I also use Selenium, but it has many disadvantages. Selenium is mainly designed for web applications, but there are limitations for automating using APIs as well as desktop applications and mobile. UiPath is much stronger. The only advantage is that Selenium is open source.

Overall, UiPath is a good tool. I would definitely recommend it for automation over Tosca.

We develop regression automation test suites for this purpose.

We are still in the early phases of development, but there has been improvement. We now have a better understanding of the various scenarios and test cases involved.

The Test Manager stands out as the most valuable component. It facilitates the delegation of control to multiple users and offers an efficient way to organize tasks using labels. Moreover, the ability to create and execute test sets is highly beneficial, allowing us to seamlessly hand over responsibilities to the manual queuing team, including those overseeing the SaaS environment.

We are facing problems specifically with Desk Manager. Some users have concerns due to the transition from the well-established HP Micro Focus ALM.

I have been using UiPath for two years.

Scalability is quite beneficial. Our business often requires very specific modules to run, and with Test Manager and Studio, it's a much simpler and more flexible process. This allows us to execute various types of tests, including targeted regressions, with ease, which is always a valuable feature.

Customer support has been consistently responsive. They don't just address issues and disappear; they follow up and ensure things are resolved. I would rate it nine out of ten.

Positive

We were previously using Micro Focus and Selenium. One of the key reasons we selected this tool is that we had previously used different tools that couldn't effectively handle multiple technologies, causing challenges in integration testing. 

The initial setup was easy. Maintenance has significantly reduced the operational challenges during execution. We no longer require manual test team intervention, allowing our test automation engineers more time to focus on their work.

Initially, we had automated just one location using a different automation tool. Our first step was to transfer those thousand test cases from the current tool to the new one, and as it became evident that the new approach was successful, we began receiving more requests from multiple teams.

The return on investment is satisfactory. It has significantly lowered the TCO for our testing efforts. While we initially invested in creating the framework during the first year, we are now in a position to cut the time required to develop test cases and automation by half compared to what we were doing with UFT.

The cost is comparable to Micro Focus Unified Functional Testing, but it offers a greater number of features. It represents good value for the investment.

We considered several options, including Kaspersky. Ultimately, we narrowed it down to Kaspersky and UiPath. While UiPath had a Test Manager, we already had experience with UiPath Studio, and we had a capable team in place. This familiarity led us to choose it.

The advice I would offer is to engage in careful planning and thoughtful consideration before implementation. While Studio has a wealth of resources and articles, test automation, particularly in the context of RPA, requires a different approach. It's essential to thoroughly think through your strategy and how you intend to execute it. Overall, I would rate it a seven out of ten. The reason for this rating is primarily related to Desk Manager, which requires further development and improvement.

UiPath Test Suite serves two main purposes. First, it enables unit testing of automation solutions, allowing you to test the functionalities of your developed processes, which helps in faster deployment. Second, it supports regression testing of applications. If there are changes in the applications, UiPath Test Suite can be used to verify these changes and ensure that everything functions as expected.

It enhances the speed of deploying changes and maintaining live process automation. It accelerates the testing cycle, allowing for faster and more efficient testing. Additionally, it facilitates regression testing by reducing the dependency on human testers. Test bots can operate around the clock, including weekends, which helps to streamline production release cycles.

The Test Manager is a user interface tool that simplifies the use of the Test Suite. It allows users to test cases, view results, and access reports, providing an intuitive way to manage and analyze testing activities.

They have helped us automate desktop applications and browser-based applications using Test Suite.

It has reduced all the deployment cycles of the automation solutions by forty percent.

The integration is easy, and we have used it to test various applications. We have tested various applications using the Test Suite, which works seamlessly and has helped us reduce maintenance.

It would be very beneficial to do load testing with Test Suite.

I have been using UiPath Test Suite for three years.

I rate the solution’s stability an eight out of ten.

400 users are using this solution. If we scale the Test Suite, it becomes expensive.

I rate the solution’s scalability a six out of ten.

Support is always quick to respond and help us through our problems. They give us end-to-end support whenever we are stuck in a problem.

Positive

The initial setup is simple and takes a couple of days. For deployment, we were a team of four people.

Maintenance is required if the UI screens change. The test code changes depending on how frequently the application changes. If the application we are testing modifies, we need to change the code.

They have released autopilot for test developers, drastically reducing development time.

I highly recommend UiPath Test Suite to other users. It is already being used extensively by various organizations to test their applications and reduce the deployment cycle of automation solutions.

It is easy to use, develop, and deploy, and it enhances the remarkable benefits of the UiPath Test suite. It reduces the deployment cycle, helps maintain various solutions, and reduces the regression testing cycle of any application.

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

We use the product for RPA and application testing. 

UiPath's most valuable features are reusability and low-code aspects. It works across both desktop and web applications. 

UiPath needs to improve its Test Manager feature. Defect management and reporting also need improvement. 

I have been working with the solution for two to three years. 

UiPath is stable. 

The tool's scalability is not an issue due to its low-code features. 

UiPath's support is good. They have a quick turnaround time. 

Positive

We used Selenium and UFT before. We chose UiPath to consolidate everything on a single platform and move away from older technology. We have also been using it for RPA. 

We were confused with Orchestrator's installation. The solution needs to have better documentation or information around it. 

The tool's deployment was done in-house. 

We have seen ROI with the tool's use. We are still young in our testing journey with UiPath. We may see more ROI when we add more test cases. 

UiPath is very expensive. 

We evaluated the market leaders. 

We are moving away from legacy technology. We consolidate everything into a single platform. I also like the tool's low-code benefits. 

UiPath has improved our collaboration and communication with developers. It has improved the turnaround time for test scripts and test sets. 

The solution has helped us reduce maintenance by leveraging libraries. 

The product has freed up our staff's time. The turnaround time for script development is faster now. 

We use UiPath to test various technologies like web and Java applications. 

There are fewer breaks in tester scripts and faster development time. The tool has reduced total testing costs. 

I rate the product a six out of ten. 

We just need to make sure that the test cases are created, to be able to validate those results as per the expectations. We then provide the results to the respective teams. There are a lot of integrations for the Test Suite as well with Jira and DFS, et cetera. That's where we would be able to integrate with the test cases and then provide the test cases as well.

We can automate different applications. We can do a test feed on Salesforce or run it on SAP. You can use others as well. It depends on the tools you set up for the test cases on the test system.

If someone is already using UiPath products, this is a good product to add. 

When I tried, I was able to integrate it with Jira, then CI/CD, et cetera. There have been advancements in the functionalities of more activities. I'd rate the ability to integrate with other products seven out of ten. 

The product has helped us to reduce maintenance by 40% or 50%. It's effective at testing whatever automation we've built or making sure the automation we've built is working fine. It's pretty advanced for testing all of the functionalities and we've seen some recent advancements and improvements in UiPath. 

I don't rate its ability to automate very well. There are other tools that are doing great work. For example, Selenium is a product that does absolutely tremendous work with test automation. It provides continuous integration and improvement with different technologies and tools. I'd rate Test Suite as 6.5 out of ten in terms of its automation capabilities.

Not many organizations would be willing to use UiPath as it would be an additional tool and the majority of organizations already are using Selenium or other automation tools. 

It's difficult at times. 

The adaptability of the solution could be better. 

You cannot use UiPath Test Suite as a silo product. You would need to use it in relation to their products.

I've been using the solution for two and a half years.

UiPath is not a new tool. It is mature. It's ramped up over the years to a great extent. It's great with basic automation as well as document understanding.

We've received direct support from UiPath and they were able to provide good guidance on how to deal with multiple products and they were able to provide access to tools as needed. 

Positive

We did not previously use a different test automation tool. 

Selenium is one of the other major products we evaluated. It's used in many organizations. I've used it in an organization I worked at as well. The other organization was much more focused on Selenium.

We have not witnessed the solution reduce the total cost of testing. We haven't looked into that aspect.

I'd rate Test Suite six out of ten. 

If we are trying to test code, we do it with Selenium. I'd recommend Selenium for that. It might be difficult to do with Test Suite. 

I work with the solution in order to automate tasks in our company. It works alongside our Jira product. We can coordinate with Python to automate tasks and use AI.

It's useful for automating tasks. We can automate alongside our UI. Manual testing takes too much time. For the business, it makes things much easier. 

The integration with solutions such as Jenkins. The ability of Test Suite to automate tests from a wide range of technologies is very good. We can automate anything. 

It's helped us free up staff time for other projects. The more we automate, the more time we can spend on fixing bugs.

Test Suite is great for integrating with other lifecycle tools and applications in our environment. We can integrate tests in our continuous pipeline - with Jenkins, for example. We can plug right into our pipelines and GitLab.

We've been able to reduce maintenance by integrating with maintenance solutions.

We have been able to save the time needed for testing.

The computation is very good. 

We'd like to see the solution integrate with more code or local frameworks. 

We'd like to see it work closer with AI. It would help enhance UiPath.

I've used the solution for two months. 

I do not have experience working with support. 

I have used other solutions, including Rubrik, in the past. UiPath allowed us to use it for testing and automating tasks. If a team member isn't good with programming, they can still use UiPath.

The initial setup was not complex. It was simple to deploy. We did a continuous integration strategy. We were able to deploy it quickly and easily.

There is some maintenance required after deployment. 

I've been able to find a way to work with UiPath without having to pay fees. 

It's a great tool, and AI can continue to enhance it. 

For those worried that their automation testing is too complex, I'd advise them that it would not be with UiPath. You should just understand the testing process in Jira and the RPA process. The tool will ensure simplicity. As long as you know the fundamentals of the test, UiPath can automate. It's not hard. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. 

We use UiPath Test Suite to perform testing for a client's product. It helps automate internal technologies, which I am not supposed to disclose.

The solution has automated processes, thereby eliminating the need for manual testing, which has led to cost savings. Although the exact percentage saved is unclear, it has indeed saved time.

UiPath Test Suite is user-friendly and operates as a low-code platform. Additionally, it offers all necessary functionalities.

More precise logging would be appreciated. Additionally, addressing some bugs could improve functionality, and pricing could be more competitive.

We have been using UiPath Test Suite for approximately 15 months.

UiPath Test Suite is not always stable. There are some downtimes, so I would rate its stability at seven point five out of ten.

The solution is very scalable and addresses our business needs.

The initial setup was straightforward.

The solution was immediately effective upon deployment.

UiPath Test Suite is costly; the licenses are expensive.

If there is a budget constraint, I would not recommend UiPath Test Suite, but if not, then I would definitely recommend it.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.