Worksoft Certify Reviews

We are using Worksoft Certify to enable our stakeholders to do test automation on the UI level.

We use it for end-to-end testing of packaged applications. We are part of the internal IT department within our company. Most of the time we are using it on our own products. The products and systems that we get are usually preconfigured and prepackaged and we do additional testing, not just for the functionality for the coding that we add to the product, but also on the prepackaged solutions.

We use it for all kinds of applications. Our focus is the web area, including web-UI testing of modern applications. We have two tools in place: our own internal corporate test automation tool, and Worksoft Certify. The latter is a complementary tool, especially in the web area where there are some white spots for our corporate tool which it cannot cover. That was the main reason why we brought in another tool. And for that, it fits perfectly.

We are able to run our test phases faster. Once the scripts, the test cases, are ready and automated, not only are we able to check our systems or landscapes during the test phases, but we can proactively monitor our development and test systems. Proactive monitoring of our systems is very important for us and was not possible before because manual testing is just too time intensive.

Worksoft Certify helped us to increase time savings. We didn't start test automation in general with Worksoft Certify. We did automation before with our own tool, but it helped us to increase the coverage of test automation and to increase the time savings.

We had a success story with two teams. For the execution of the scripts, we had time savings of 82, 88, 95, and 90 percent. And for the speed, it was between nine and 21 times faster than manual execution.

It's not necessarily saving us money, but it's helping us to free up the capacities of our end users to work on other stuff. Instead of doing testing for two days, they can work on bug fixing, developing new features, etc. That person still gets the same paycheck at the end of the month, so it's not saving us money, but it increases the value of our products. It increases the quality of our products. The reason for that is we are not customer-facing. We are dealing with internal teams and internal products. We are not selling anything to the outside. We are with the internal IT department. For the development teams and the sales team or the consulting team it might be different. But we are not really going out, selling our products and getting the revenue for the company. This is done by other teams.

It's script-free, which is really important for our end users because we are usually dealing with colleagues who are not developers and who do not always have the technical background of developing and scripting. It's very useful that there is a nice UI and the tool is script-free.

It covers all of the technologies we need to cover.

And one big advantage of Worksoft Certify is its integration with SAP Solution Manager, the test suite of Solution Manager, with the certification. That is crucial for us since Solution Manager is our test management tool of choice.

There are a couple of small things, technically, that could be improved.

Features we have asked for include single sign-on. It's a bigger project to make sure that our end users do not have to store passwords, usernames, and the like, for the different tools we have. 

We are also working on an additional integration with another tool that we have in place for lights-out testing. That's ongoing at the moment.

Another idea we brought is that the definitions for the objects need to be automated. They need to be recognized automatically by Worksoft Certify instead of changing them back and forth manually. This is also something that Worksoft is currently working on. 

Updates, in general, is a topic that we are working on with Worksoft on a regular basis. For new products, for new UI technologies when they come out, the test-automation providers need to update their definitions to make sure that the objects are recognized correctly.

It is pretty stable. After upgrades, we usually don't experience any big issues. Of course, it's software, so here and there we find bugs, but nothing crazy, to be honest. The availability of the system is pretty good, almost 100 percent. I don't see an issue here.

At the moment we don't have any issues with scalability. We have about 300 end users working with Worksoft. On infrastructure, it's split. We have a WTS environment, a Citrix environment, for those colleagues who want to use the prepared environment. We have other colleagues who are using the client on their own machines, on their own laptops or desktops. The only thing that we saw at the beginning which we need to change in the future is that, due to the latency, we cannot use clients in the US, for example, while having the server in Germany.

If the latency is over a certain number of milliseconds then it is basically impossible to do automation. That was one of the main reasons why we set up the Citrix environment at the very beginning.

We are still in the phase within our company, or within IT services, of training and spreading the topic of test automation, overall. So our coverage, at the moment, is not the entire organization, it's only the IT department. Once we have done this - and it will take at least another year - we will see if we spread using Worksoft and our internal corporate tool as a combination, or tool ecosystem, further into the organization. But this is not our not our team's responsibility so it's not really in focus at the moment. We are pushing for test automation in our teams and there is still a huge demand for training and new teams coming into the topic of test automation.

In general, technical support is good. They are collaborative and responsive. The only thing I don't like - and this is the only complaint I usually have for Worksoft - is that the first-level support is not always the best for working on topics. We sometimes need to escalate to second-level support and then we know that we are getting a colleague who is aware of the issue and is not just playing for time.

We already reported this to Worksoft and asked them to find another way or to educate the first-level support or to make sure that the tickets go directly to second-level support if they come from us. The guys on our end who are reporting the issues sometimes know more than the first-level support.

When it comes to second-level support, we are happy. There, we know we will get the help that we need. The colleagues are responsive and very helpful and, from a quality perspective, they are very good.

In the beginning, there were some issues with the integration, it didn't work the way we wanted. We spent some time with the Worksoft team, with the support and engineering team, in adding some enhancements to adapt the solution to our three-tier Solution Manager landscape. But that worked very well.

We have a very good collaboration and relationship to Worksoft. For example, every two weeks we have calls with them. We'll provide feedback and they take it seriously. They usually provide us with updates, with enhancements, with new functionalities that we need. That's working pretty well.

We started with manual testing and then we started the test-automation initiative. We started with our internal corporate tool and then, as I mentioned earlier, we figured out that we could not cover everything with that. At the end of 2015, we started to check the market. We did some PoCs and we decided to go forward with Worksoft Certify.

There were a number of reasons we went with Worksoft Certify. The Worksoft team did a great job. They came to our headquarters and did the PoC, showing that the tool is suitable for our needs. They did another PoC with our operations colleagues who were running the regressions testing in Singapore. And then there were the technical requirements that we had. Worksoft Certify was able to cover all of them, some of which I have mentioned already: Being script-free, being fully integrated in Solution Manager, and being able to script in a modular way. And finally, the integration between our own internal tool and Worksoft Certify was also important.

The initial setup was pretty much straightforward. I cannot give you too many details because I did not take care of the implementation. But I know that it took us about two weeks to set up the whole infrastructure. It was not really difficult. And we had very good support from Worksoft, from the support and engineering team. They helped us in setting up the database, setting up the connections. It was not a big deal. In total, within two to four weeks, everything was working fine.

On our side, we had a couple of staff members involved in the implementation because our team is the application owner. We had to involve two more colleagues from the database team because we don't have all the authorization stuff, for the databases area, for the servers etc. In total we had about three staff members involved, but not full-time. It was about one work-week for each of them.

Maintenance is done by myself and one of my colleagues, with the help of our database and server/infrastructure team. We don't have authorizations for everything and we are not database experts. There are three or four staff members taking care of maintenance, as part of our job; it's not a full-time job, obviously.

Whenever we need to do a full upgrade, when we need to plan the downtime for the production system, we try to make it on the weekend. I also already recommended to Worksoft that it would be nice to have something like an offline update where the system can be upgraded or smaller changes and fixes can be included without having full downtime. For an upgrade we usually need two to three hours. Afterward, we do a bit of testing, so upgrading takes about half a day.

It was just one or two people from Worksoft and three guys on our side.

We get feedback from all areas that the return on investment is there. Not just regarding time savings, but also cost-reduction. The return on investment in one case was reached at something between five and six runs, which is pretty fast, especially in an Agile environment.

What is also very important for us here is the avoidance of human error during the execution of tests. Usually, if someone is sitting in front of a laptop and doing testing eight hours a day, he or she will make some mistakes. This does not happen with a tool. Another important factor for us is the availability for testing. Usually, it's pretty hard to plan a test phase to bring all the testers to the table and get the time blocked off for the test phases. For the tools, we just need the systems up and running and then it's a matter of minutes to set up the test plans and to run the tests.

At the moment we are rolling out Execution Manager.

At the time we decided to bring in Worksoft Certify, we looked into two other tools. The key difference was that Worksoft was script-free. That was not the case for other tools. And the full integration to Solution Manager was one of the key differentiators between the tools.

If you have done a market evaluation and have decided to go for Worksoft, my advice is to go for it. I would definitely recommend Worksoft Certify as a test automation tool.

The feedback that I get from our stakeholders is that the tool is pretty simple to use. What we usually do is a two-week training, not full time, where the total is about three to four business days, 20 to 25 work hours. From there, most of our colleagues can start working with the tool. Of course, they have questions later on, some difficulties when it gets into special activities. But overall, the tool is easy to use. It's generally found to be intuitive.

In terms of cutting test maintenance time with respect to the scripts, that has not happened. If you need to adapt your scripts, automated test scripts are much more complex and more effort-intensive than manual test cases. But this is the nature of the beast. It will happen with every tool. If a screen changes, if a system changes, then you have to adapt your script for manual testing. For a manual script, you just adapt a Word document or an Excel sheet or the like. But if the process flow changes, you have new windows, new options, then you have to adjust your script for each and every provider that you're selecting. The maintenance of scripts is something that I always discuss with my end users and should never be underestimated.

We are not using the Capture 2.0 feature at the moment. We are planning to use it in the future. But at the moment, due to the heavy workload on our plate, we haven't had the chance to look into and to roll it out. We are familiar with the concept of Capture and it's a very nice feature because it makes the collaboration between business and IT much easier, and business can be involved in test-automation topics and activities as well.

We have three roles in our environment. We have the key players, who are the project managers, the persons responsible for test automation overall in the respective teams.
Then we have the test automation engineers who are responsible for creating test scripts and to maintain them; sometimes they run them as well. And finally, we have the executors, the ones who are running the scripts, checking the details and, if something is not working fine, going back to the test-automation engineers and asking for support and help.

I rate Worksoft Certify at nine out of ten. I'm happy with the tool, I'm happy with our colleagues at Worksoft. We have a very good relationship, we can bring up everything. There isn't much I can complain about. I'm happy at the moment with Worksoft.

We mainly use Worksoft Certify for SAP automation, whereas we have web-based SAP and normal SAP background applications.

Worksoft Certify has helped organizations save time by using automation.

The most valuable features of Worksoft Certify are the way we can maintain the processes and sub-processes inside. We can immediately identify and replicate multiple objects in the application without having a major issue with it. We are able to do a lot of operations even with the solution being completely scriptless. That is a large advantage compared with other automation tools.

There are some other more complete tools than Worksoft Certify, such as Tricentis Tosca. It has a quicker way of taking in a customer's feedback with more efficiency. I do not see Worksoft Certify having a lot of progress over the years that we have used the tool in this area.

From 2014 to 2022, there were fewer improvements in the UI looks and feel. Overall there were fewer improvements in the solution. There were some challenges that we faced with our customers, and Worksoft Certify provides customer-specific call announcements. For example, customer A is trying to work on Worksoft Certify, they will face a specific challenge in utilizing the tool, and Worksoft Certify provides a custom solution to them. With customer B, they are faced with other challenges, and Worksoft Certify provided them with a customized solution. There is a chance that the same issue that was faced with customer A, customer B had also. Instead of Worksoft Certify providing a dedicated solution for everyone, they were providing solutions on a customized level. They can improve on this process.

There were some challenges that we faced with respect to automation. For example, there were some areas where we had to do a drag and drop of some of the objects from one place to another. In some of the areas in SAP where you have to perform a drag and drop, that feature was not available in Worksoft Certify. We had to find some alternate ways of doing those things.

I have been using Worksoft Certify for approximately three years.

The performance and stability of Worksoft Certify were good. We don't see a lot of issues or challenges that we're facing in this area. We have a 98 percent stability rate. We don't expect a lot of issues to happen in the application. On the SAP side, it was completely normal, it was working as expected, but coming to the web-based applications, when there are major changes. We have to remap the controls sometimes to ensure that the controls are working as expected.

Worksoft Certify is a highly scalable solution. However, it was a bit slower compared to the other automation tools. For example, Tricentis Tosca is providing major competition to Worksoft Certify and they are slightly a better tool. Whenever Worksoft Certify faces any challenges they're providing some patches to fix them, and that is helping the automation to grow faster and more efficiently. We have the layouts and plenty of recordsets that make Worksoft Certify more scalable.  

As an architect, I have to compare the support to other automation tools, there are some free tools, such as Selenium, where there is no support. However, there are some tools, such as Tricentis Tosca, where there is a dedicated technical support team who are available 24 hows a day seven days a week in the chat. We can directly chat and communicate with them. With Worksoft Certify we have to contact them directly and sometimes it can take some time, and the solutions that they provide are customer-specific. That is another challenge because when we have to work with multiple customers, this is another challenge that we face.

Neutral

I have been using multiple automation tools, such as Worksoft Certify, UFT, and Tricentis Tosca. Additionally, I have worked on other automation tools, such as Selenium and AccelQ. I provide solutions to the clients based on their requirements. I work on different automation tools.

We have a set of regression test cases that are already identified with the customer. They used to provide those sets of regression test cases to be used in their projects. We had to create some processes and sub-processes, such as our layouts and recordsets for the projects. Once we create all our sets, we create our regression suites using these areas and start working on them. We used to do a time-bound process where we needed to automate all these elements in a specific set of time that we had. Once we are done with the automation, we performed the activation of the sets in a cycle.

For the understanding of the requirements of Worksoft Certify, it did not take us a lot of time because we understand the process which is very important. Due to the specific functional area in SAP initial took the automation developers some time until they understood the functional requirement. However, once we understood how we were going to handle or manage the static and dynamic data, then the automation was simple using Worksoft Certify.

Once we complete the automation, our SMEs used to start utilizing this solution whenever there is any deployment. Instead of triggering the script manually, our SME triggers the automation scripts that they have the regression suite executed, and for other new automation scripts. Whatever the testing team tests the functional they started using Worksoft Certify for creating those automation scripts and started using them. There are different clients requirements based on the deployments. The deployments used to happen every two months, we have some regression suite to be executed, and whatever the new development that is going to happen, we used to utilize the dev environment to automate them and start executing them in the QA. This way they were faster and we can do instant automation.

We typically have a team of six people who were involved in the development of our particular automation scripts, and the exact number of people depends on the project that needs these scripts. For example, in my initial project where I worked on Worksoft Certify, we had a team of 13 people who were working for different process areas. We have different areas, such as production planning, retail management, and quality management service. Each area was handled by a specific developer and we used to have some teammates who were helping us and assisting in the automation of these scripts.

Normally it can take clients a lot of time for doing the regression. Using Worksoft Certify has reduced the time needed for this process. They don't need to replace all their SMEs for performing the regression because normally it used to take a lot of time for doing the initial regression activation. There were a lot of bugs that were reported and were reduced when we started using this tool. They used to use 10 people for doing the regression previously, for a span of a week. By using Worksoft Certify with using the automation scripts and 10 different systems activations happening, we saved a lot of time. We have seen a return on investment by using Worksoft Certify.

Worksoft Certify is slightly more expensive compared to other automation tools that are available on the market. However, the majority of the clients who are utilizing this solution, don't care much about the price. The main aspect the clients look for is its stability and reliability on the automation and whether they are able to rely on the automation scripts.

The solution can be purchased in different packages, some can include support.

I have evaluated lots of other solutions.

I have approximately eleven years of experience in this industry and over the past few years, I have been working as a senior architect.

Worksoft Certify is a good tool, but any tool can perform efficiently if you follow the best practices. If you're not following or utilizing the tool properly, there are chances that you might miss the opportunity. The main challenge with script less automation tools, such as Worksoft Certify or Tricentis Tosca is that you have to implement it along with best practices, and if proper best practices are implemented for these tools from the beginning, they can be extremely efficient and beneficial tools that can help to reduce efforts.

I rate Worksoft Certify a seven out of ten.

We're using it to move manual tests over to automated tests to use on major programs and projects going on within the company. We are also moving to Dell EMC Embedded Boxes for an agile approach from a waterfall approach, and part of our new addition for 2019 after merging with a new company. Our role now is to automate as much as we can for usability.

We're doing mostly end-to-end testing scenarios. We use it on SAP and ServiceNow web services, along with SRM, CRM, and various applications.

We have an internal web portal, as well as an external. We did automation for it to do regression testing and build a test space.

The most valuable feature is its time saving. Once development is complete, the short time that it takes to execute a test is invaluable. It saves a number of dollars and man-hours. 

The Capture 2.0 feature is very intuitive, useful, and user-friendly. You can do so much with it now, versus the older version.

We had a lot of issues with the optics changing because they're dynamic. We just recently learned they are already worked on fixing it.

Another feature that they are also working on is being able to export processes from one project and upload it to another project. Therefore, we can change our both structures within Worksoft. We prefer to run and set it up based on business use for separate projects. It's exciting to know that this is coming. We want to be able to move assets from project to another project without having to be in the same project or the same folder structure.

I would like the GUI to be more user-friendly and intuitive. E.g., previously, the buttons were gray. Now, they have color to them and are fun for the user. It also makes them easier to identify.

It is very stable. For example, we used it with ServiceNow. We did automation all last year for an upgrade. Once they did the upgrade, we ran a test after the upgrade and everything was successful.

It is very scalable.

The technical support has been good, but sometimes there are little delays. A lot of times when we need support, it's an emergency situation. However, we are able to reach out to our contacts, and they're able to expedite it, which has been very helpful.

Our upper management wanted to be able to do testing much quicker than what we're actually doing with the manual process. We had to research and find a tool which could provide value for the company.

We had QTP, which wasn't very user-friendly from a coding perspective. There was only a small group of people who could actually use the tool. With Worksoft, we were able to push it out to the business.

I set it up. I just followed the instructions. It was easily done.

We've saved over 80 percent in time savings.

Worksoft Certify was the only tool that we found in which you did not have to know coding or know how to script to create a test. It's more user-friendly, more intuitive, and we also have business users who are actually developing as we speak on major projects and programs.

Worksoft was able to come in on a PoC and actually do automation development on the fly. The previous vendors that I worked with for months, they never could do one test within our environment. Our environment is very complex. It has a lot of policies turned on and off, which is a challenge for a lot of vendors.

Give them a chance, because you won't regret it.

We use the solution in pharmacy and retail.

We focus on automation solutions for SAP, Oracle, and Salesforce. Worksoft Certify is developed and designed to support these platforms. It matches what we want to achieve, providing capabilities in process mining and generating process documentation from these cases. Additionally, it can create RPA bots to execute tasks in production, making it a meaningful tool.

Worksoft developed a tool to support ERP testing. All prebuilt functions are good at steering the application when the test is executed.

Some features are missing from a testing perspective. You need to know how to connect everything to create requirements and stability metrics for the routine.

I rate the solution’s stability a seven out of ten.

You can scale it as you want. Just install it properly. It is suitable for enterprise customers.

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

The initial setup is easy and can be completed in two days. The team provided good support. 

I rate the initial setup a nine out of ten, where one is difficult, and ten is easy. 

They conducted marketing research through some external agencies, which reported an ROI of 583% over a five-year period. This is quite significant. You don't need people to edit test cases manually; instead, it creates and runs tests automatically whenever you wish, even after working hours or at any time.

The tool is worth the money.

The usability of test cases and running tests overnight is a definite advantage of Worksoft Certify. This provides great visibility into the process. One notable feature of Worksoft Certify is its support for SAP migration. For example, it fully supports SAP migrations. Many customers use ECC, which is becoming a legacy and must migrate to SAP S/4HANA. You can create your test cases in ECC and run them later in S/4HANA. It saves a lot of time. Additionally, you can perform parallel testing to ensure that the new functionality implemented in S/4HANA matches the legacy system.

I recommend Worksoft Certify because of its stability. The company has been in business for almost thirty years, maintaining the same customer base. They have a substantial portfolio and extensive experience, contributing to their reliability and effectiveness.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

We get user stories from the DevOps teams, in conjunction with a recording they make with another Worksoft tool. Then we will investigate if it has already been automated and, if not, to automate the process which has been delivered to us.

This is all set up in a Citrix environment. We have SAP being used at the moment and we still have the old SAP ECC up and running. I'm not sure which part of this is cloud-based, but the Certify solution is installed on Citrix.

Because of the fact that we started just six months ago and we have a small team. But slowly but surely we are gaining more audience; more people are starting to get interested. That should lead us to be able to start implementing it the way it should be done. We have done some regression testing and, when doing so, we found real issues. So it has proven itself to be useful during regression testing at least.

We have definitely seen savings in testing time. Scripts are executed five or even 10 times faster than any one of us could do by hand. While we don't do so at the moment, we are going to start executing them in a lights-out environment. We will run tests during the night and get more numbers, execute more tests. That should also help us save time. We have to get the experience and the numbers for this, but I think it will save us a lot of time.

The biggest feature is the fact that it's codeless. It takes away the problem of finding people with the correct programming language, since there are multiple such languages. It saves time in introducing people to the solution because they don't need programming knowledge, they just need to be able to think logically. This makes it vastly usable by more people who are not even acquainted with IT at all.

Also, the solution's web UI testing abilities for testing of modern applications is pretty awesome. Like with every product there are some parts which can be improved, but overall it's great.

It's very easy to use and to install. You have to know, as a user, what your exact application is on the test; you need to know which object recognition files you need to use.

You use the tool to do your automated testing. As far as I know at this moment, it can do a lot of stuff. It's usable in DevOps, so with regards to packaged and non-packaged software, it's good.

I use Capture from within Certify. I also have a stand-alone capture that I have up and running. If you look at the whole cycle, it takes the user a lot of time to create the records. During the capture, the responsiveness of the system is really slow. But after that, when you send it to Analyze, the documentation is really easy. Just click the button and choose the format. Automate is the same. You just create automation and choose a file name. Then, when you need it, you just download it into Certify and start using it. We've been doing it for some time now.

The Capture feature helps find the actual processes to test for and to create end-to-end testing. We ask the users, when we are making the recordings, not only to enter the proper data but also to provide us with comments or LiveTouch images of messages that need to be recorded. They know, "Okay, when I see this message then it's up and running." Because they take the end-to-end as a whole in the recording, we can use that as process knowledge as well. So the process is, in fact, being captured in the Analyze software.

In terms of the solution's ability to build tests and reuse them, I would rate it at eight out of 10. We record it on one environment. We make it completely environment-agnostic, data driven. Once recorded, we can reuse it on every single environment in the development cycle, which is awesome.

Performance on the web UI part, especially with some of the more comprehensive Fiori features, like the complex tables that are being used, could be improved. In those cases we have noticed a lot of execution-time increase with regards to the Certify solution.

I have been using Worksoft Certify for six months now. I started using it in September of 2019.

We've had no Certified-related stability problems. We have issues with things like Execution Manager and Analyze. I'm not sure if those problems are infrastructure-related or due to the Worksoft setup, but with regards to Certify it's stable. Sometimes there is a crash, but I think it's more related to the fact we're doing a lot of complex stuff in a Citrix environment with low resources.

The solution hasn't enabled us to scale up testing yet. We're on the way forward, but because of some issues in our own architecture we are not able to execute those tests. But I know how the setup is working, and I think you can scale up really easily; just add more machines, add more users, and have a go.

When I started within the program itself, no one else was using it. There were two users on the Railnova team. At this moment, about 10 or 12 people are using but within a couple of months we will be around 50 users in total.

I would rate Worksoft's technical support somewhere between a six or seven out of 10. In two-thirds of the cases we get a proper technical support member who has the knowledge to help us with our problem. But at other times we get someone who doesn't really know what he or she is doing or doesn't really understand the issue.

Another big part of the grade I gave is the fact that when you are in contact with the call center, a lot of times there really is a lot of background noise. With the accent, it's already really tough for me in fact to understand them, and with the background noise the problem gets bigger. But I've had also a lot of support from the Germans and from all over the world. Most of them are really capable.

It's an easy setup. There are some small configuration settings and then you can have a go. It's all up to the user to do the updates on the definition files. That's also easily available to us.

I started using the software without hearing from Worksoft. I only had to do some courses on the Worksoft University web page they provide. I didn't have any real, proper training, and I was up and running within two or three weeks. And within two months, I was able to provide enough support to get multiple teams within our company up and running with Worksoft. It's really straightforward.

I wasn't part of it, but I believe the initial setup and further configurations took two or three months in total.

Because of the fact that it's also able to do orchestration and because of the fact that our company is moving from the old SAP towards SAP Fiori — they wanted to have the main focus on Fiori for the UI part, in conjunction with the orchestration which Worksoft is able to do — at first it was only UI-driven. But we will expand into more and more Worksoft uses.

The company used a Worksoft consultant for the deployment but I don't know her name.

We, as a company, have good contact with one of the Dutch Worksoft managers and he introduced the integrator to us, as that manager is from the United States. The consultant came over for a week to give us some training on a number of things because we are not only using Certify.

They were really happy with her. A lot of questions were answered, a lot of issues were resolved. She was able to contact Worksoft support really fast. They had a blast while she was here.

We haven't seen ROI yet because we are in start-up mode with Certify. At this time we are only investing in the solution. Hopefully, we will be able to have some insights into ROI within a half-year from now.

The licensing is yearly.

My advice would be to think outside of the box. If you've chosen to work with Worksoft, you have to embrace the product as a whole. You will find, as with any other product, that some things that don't operate the way you want them to or would have expected them to. But if you teach yourself to view your problems from different angles using the software, then you will be able to come up with the most brilliant solutions. You can do much more with a codeless tool than you might think upfront.

The biggest lesson I have learned using comes back to the codeless part. I view myself as a smart guy, but I don't have the proper coding language knowledge. I was working for myself over the course eight years, before working here, and oftentimes the jobs were really cool, but most of the time I had to do Python and this and that. That was always a struggle because sometimes, when you've learned a language but you're not using it for a year or two years and you want to go back, you have to start remembering it. So I was turned down for those jobs. In this case, and we can show the world that it can be done codeless, if you have the proper tools.

When I was first introduced to Worksoft and they told me it was codeless, I was really skeptical. I said, "I don't see that happening," because I had been doing this for quite a while and was used to doing some coding. But the tool convinced me otherwise, which is really nice.

Overall, it's capable of being used in modern technology environments. I have been using it for six months now and I still have a lot of learning to do. And as a company, we need to start using more of the Certify features, not only scripting and rerunning those scripts.

Most of the people who are using it right now in our company already have some testing experience, but it's our goal to have business and IT people use the Capture feature as part of the process for DevOps.

We don't do test maintenance at the moment. We started out with test automation. We had to set up a base for the DevOps teams and then support them from that point onwards. So we are slowly moving into the maintenance part. Because we have split the data from the script itself — everything is data-driven — so it should be fairly easy for us to make the necessary changes. I think execution is faster when compared to human hand movements. But for changing or maintenance, I don't know.

The solution hasn't enabled us to find more defects at the moment, because we have been focusing on "happy path" testing. We need to get to the end-point of the end-to-end testing. But I believe, and I'm rather positive about this, that if defects are entered into the system, given that our regression test set covers a big percentage of the complete solution, it should be able to find defects really fast. Faster than we can.

The Certify users within our company are all in scripting. We're developers. And because we are in a scrum team, we don't have different roles in our team for test automation. A lot of things are being delivered by DevOps the teams, which you can view as functional consultants. As for the deployment and maintenance, a lot of it is outsourced to one of our partners. We do have functional and technical maintenance or support. I'm the technical guy and then we have two functional guys as well.

I use Worksoft Certify primarily for the functional testing of SAP applications.

I run Worksoft Certify for the entire end-to-end process flow to ensure that it is always working before and after patch upgrades, release upgrades, or any changes to the system when I run the test script.

My company gets some savings in manpower and cost and enjoys a boost in productivity because you only need a few hours to run end-to-end testing using the tool. If you do it manually, the process takes a few weeks, so Worksoft Certify greatly benefits my company.

What I like about Worksoft Certify is that end-to-end testing becomes faster.

The problem with Worksoft Certify is that it's not always stable. It runs on a live platform that's constantly changing, so the test script needs to be adjusted every time, which is very painful. That's the pain point in Worksoft Certify, and if Worksoft could make the solution more stable and more "change-proof," that would help my company greatly.

A feature I want to see in Worksoft Certify is for it to be able to work on test cases on mobile devices, though that could be difficult. I also wish to have more portability in the solution in terms of the script because, in the SAP environment, my company has to run Worksoft Certify in more than one system, so if Worksoft can make the process more portable, than would be fantastic.

I've been working with Worksoft Certify for about four years now.

Worksoft Certify could be more stable. It has stability issues.

Scalability is closely linked to stability. If Worksoft Certify is stable, then it's easily scalable, and if it's not stable, then it's still scalable, but every time, you have to make some adjustments.

I'm working with Worksoft Certify.

I always work with the latest version of the solution.

My rating for Worksoft Certify is eight out of ten.

My company brought on Worksoft to assist us with an SAP upgrade in order to make it so the testing was less stressful for business users through automated testing.

We configured Worksoft to setup our SAP testing environment after a refresh by regenerating all of our testing users. This sets them up with the right access, the right approvals, and everything on the back-end so we can do our scripts the next night.

The Capture 2.0 feature recording the process automatically as you go through. It saves everyone a lot of time. It allows the business to give IT the process they go through without having to spell it out so it can be recreated as an ongoing test.

There is a learn functionality where Worksoft learns applications that would be nice if Worksoft expanded its support for other applications that aren't web-oriented.

We have had some stability issues just getting stuff setup. It seems to be pretty stable outside of the web UI. We have had some issues with our testing running into nightly backups of database backups, etc. That has caused some issues, but when we get everything ironed out in a nice, controlled environment, it seems to be pretty good. The web can be a bit finicky sometimes, but it's just that the response times aren't always the same. So, it's a little harder for it to be resilient.

The scalability is really good. We had just talked with Worksoft about if there were any limits in terms of how long your scripts can run for or how many can be running at one time on the database. It seems the only concern is the hardware that you are running it on.

We ran into some issues with the version that we were on during the initial setup. We ran into a bug on one version, then they upgraded us to a new version, and we got hit with another bug. So, they had to put us in a beta. That was a little frustrating. However, besides the bugs that we ran into, the install was pretty straightforward.

It saves us time. It makes it so we are not as worried about changes which are going into the system. We know that we have nightly runs to ensure that things are working. In general, with upgrades, we can always rely on the testing to make sure that certain business processes are working. If they do stop working, we know when/where and can tie that back to changes in the environment easier.

We use this solution for functional testing and end to end regression testing.

One of the biggest advantages for this solution is codeless automation. Because it is codeless, you can train people within a couple of hours.

The overall speed and performance of this solution could be improved. In a future release, it would be useful to be able to do API testing. 

I have used this solution for one and a half years.

The stability of this solution could be improved. 

This is a scalable solution. 

The first line support of this solution are not that knowledgeable. They do not know the products well. They have knowledge of common issues and provide a check list they want you to perform. If the issue reoccurs, they contact another layer of technical support and this is really good. 

Neutral

The initial setup of this solution was straightforward as long as you have the SQL database up and running. It is a quick setup. 

This solution is expensive. 

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.