Worksoft Certify Reviews

It is not for the entire automation process. It is mainly for anything which needs to be automated. Instead of just replacing human work, which it is doing now. It also includes robotic process automation for when we are replacing centralize manual work.

Our clients use Worksoft Certify for end-to-end testing of packaged applications and web UI testing of modern applications.

I have been using BPP and Execution Manager for more than seven years. I sell the product to different clients.

It is a great improvement, especially from my client side, where I have implemented it. One of my clients wanted to replace weekend production and support. They were using mini applications that did not need to work on the weekends. So, it was purely replaced with Certify's automation, so they did not need to come into the office on the weekends. This saves a lot of time and frees employees up on weekends.

The tool itself is a great tool. There are some other tool out there which support only web applications as opposed to only Windows-based applications, etc. It is a huge improvement, as it recognizes complex general applications, where most tools won't recognize the objects within them.

It is very easy to use, but there are some places where they need to improve their security. E.g., the BPP tool is just a URL, which does not ask you for a username and password. Anyone can login and can see it. This is a challenge.

Regarding the Execution Manager, which is good, since it comes with a username, password, etc. However, once you are logged inside, anyone can execute anything. It shouldn't allow this. Worksoft should create restrictions at the folder level structures, or somewhere they know they can align only few people to do the job, instead of allowing anyone do anything that they like.

The stability is good.

The scalability is working well for our needs.

The technical support is good. I would like them to get straight to the problem and provide solutions instead of asking a thousand questions.

Worksoft Certify has a very simple language. Our clients want to save on cost and ensure everyone who is manual testing knows it takes more effort.

The solution has cut our clients' test maintenance time for changes, like patches or system upgrades. They used to take a lot of time until the production validation completed. Now, it is just seconds until it is ready, so they can do executions within couple of minutes. 

This solution has enabled our clients to automate and save time (approximately 40 to 50 percent).

The product has saved our clients' money

The product works well with SAP and non-SAP products.

Use this tool. It is really good.

The primary use case is regression testing and test automation.

We use this solution for end-to-end testing of packaged applications, like SAP, ServiceNow, and some in-house web apps (which we built).

We have already found some defects using the test automation. 

One of the bigger value-adds that we had was extracting data from our warning systems to be inputted into our new learning system.

We automated because of the value. Our business users do a lot of regression testing. They often don't have the time when we need to get the testing done, so this frees them up to do more value-added work for the company.

• Speed, as far as getting tests completed on time. 
• Its ease of use and the value of that. It is a lot easier to maintain test scripts on Worksoft Certify than on other testing tools that we have had in the past.

We have had run ins with some bugs on Business Process Procedure (BPP) and Execution Manager. 

We also did upgrade Worksoft Certify recently to clear up some issues with server fogging.

More than five years.

It scales pretty well.

I would rate technical support as a seven out of ten. Sometimes, we end up going back and forth with Level 1 support. Usually, if we go back and forth, it is email most of the time, and sometimes it is once a day with 24-hour turnaround. We usually understand what they require and trying to give as much information as possible. We still need to tell them to kick it up to Level 2 support or at least have a meeting with them, so we can show them what is going on. Sometimes, it does get a little frustrating, but once we either have the meeting or get Level 2 support, the issue gets resolved pretty quickly.

We had and still use QuickTest Professional from Micro Focus a little bit, but we were approached back in 2008 about getting into Worksoft Certify.

We went with Worksoft Certify because of its ease of use. You don't have to know a scripting language, like with QuickTest Professional. Also, it has ease of maintenance.

The initial setup was not really complex, just a little. We did not understand the full setup; it was just confusing. We really didn't get a full explanation of how things connected together until we actually started to use it. Once, we start using it, things became much clearer.

During the initial deployment where we received execution suite, the necessary information was not really provided. However, it was a fast deployment. We had to meet some deadlines, so people just came in and did the installs, or helped us do the installs over the phone, then afterwards we realized how things were connected.

We used Worksoft for the deployment, who was very good.

We have seen ROI by being able to free up and give time back to the business for other value-added work.

In 2008, we evaluated SAP TAO. The person who came in to do the proof on concept wasn't able to get the test scenario working at all. He had three and a half days to do it, and he couldn't do it. When Worksoft came in, they had the same length of time and were able to get that one plus another one partially working in the same time frame.

Worksoft generally seems to want to make sure you are successful at what you are trying to do. I haven't come across an employee from Worksoft that isn't willing to help. A lot of times you do get that from other salespeople, and that is just not the case from what I have seen from Worksoft. 

The product has a lot of benefits as far as getting testing done. It gives you some value back.

Well, obviously it's the test automation piece of it. Creating our scripts and being able to execute our SAP scripts in order for us to be able to do comprehensive regression testing of our SAP system.

Well, it's definitely reduced the number of defects that we have. Before, when we were manually testing everything, it was unclear to us where changes that we were making, where the impacts were in our system. I mean, we've got very smart people that work here, but they were not 100% on where the impacts were going to occur with their changes.

By automating our scripts, we were able to do more comprehensive testing and therefore eliminate the number of defects that were be introduced into our environment.

There is an impact assessment piece to Worksoft. I think that's one of the pieces that we still struggle to use.

What the tool does is, you can analyze a transport to know where your impacts are. I think that's one of the challenges that we still have -- is just getting a better handle on how to use the Impact Assessment better for us.

In our regression testing, all that, we've got a pretty good handle on that. We identified things. When we run the analyze of a transport, we're not...we've found other ways to do things better.

Four years now.

No. It's been very, very reliable. The only issue, we've virtualized everything. I think the only thing, the only real issue we encountered was with our virtual machines. It was not a Worksoft issue.

It was on our side -- once we worked with our sys-admins to investigate what was going on, they were able to resurrect the issue and we were fine. It was not a Worksoft issue at all. It was something with our virtual environment.

It's been very scalable for us;

Depending on how many licenses, it's all seat licensed. It's not a concurrent license. If you don't have people logged in, more people can't use your licenses from your pool.

You assign those licenses out to people and as you continue to grow, like I was talking about with our virtual machines, we do everything in a virtual environment for all of our Worksoft work.

As we've needed more virtual machines, we've got an image of our Worksoft clients and we just add them into our environment.

3 out of 10 -- You submit an email, so there's not really a hotline that you can call to talk to somebody on the other end.

I had familiarity with several tools out there. Turnkey is probably one that you guys have looked at. I've done a lot with the quality center products in the past...Quicktest Pro.

There's other test automation tools out there. I've got a background with test automation and Worksoft...really it was between Worksoft and Turnkey. Worksoft, we just found ,was going to better meet our needs.

Yeah. That was actually pretty straightforward. When we set up our environment, they gave us a technical support person that really walked through with our system administration team to get everything set up in our environment.

As far as training, they have a very comprehensive training program. I'm sure it's all ... I'm sure it's very good. What we did and what helped us to be very successful is we went through and did live test cases as part of our training.

Instead of spending all the time going through the books and learning the tool in and out, we went through and we got right into creating our test automation with the trainer that they sent out. That hands on experience was, it was priceless. It helped us to be successful and get going with creating all of our test automation.

Make sure...before you start any of your test automation, make sure you have the appropriate support from your business.

What I mean by that is, you have all of your business processes documented. There is a lot of prep work that goes into creating your test automation to make sure you're creating...you're creating your scripts in the most efficient manner. A lot of this testing is done based on your business process. You need to understand your business processes.

It has ability to execute the scripts without any manual intervention. It has ability to run scripts overnight without any human intervention (lights-out testing), which proves to be vital in providing wider coverage in a short time.

We are able to scale up the testing and to address more business-driven projects using Worksoft, which would not be possible with any other tools. The testing organization can cut short its budget, as it is not required to hire more testers for regression testing.

Upgrading Certify takes a lot of time and effort, which is like a small project by itself.

I have used it for two years.

We have not encountered any deployment issues.

We have not encountered any stability issues.

We have not encountered any scalability issues.

Customer service is 4.5 out of 5.

Technical support is 4.5 out of 5.

We used to use QTP, but the ability of Worksoft in the SAP automation space compelled us to make the transition.

We used the Worksoft director access to test automation.

The tool is easy to use. It is a drag and drop Microsoft type of solution.

Worksoft Certify needs improvement on customization of reporting and how you report final outcomes. It needs more customization.

I have been using Worksoft Certify for  years.

The solution is very stable.

Worksoft Certify is scalable. However, if the final output were more customizable, it would be even more scalable.

Worksoft Certify's technical support is a 3 out of 5.

Positive

The initial setup is straightforward. 

The implementation depends on the client's business. Overall, it is not very complex. It is simple and easy to implement. There is no need for a third party integrator.

We have an annual license for this solution. The product is very expensive.

Choosing this solution is entirely dependent on the specific business requirements, the time required and the budget available. If you are looking for an easy to implement scalable solution, Worksoft Certify is recommended if it works within your budget.

I would rate Worksoft Certify an 8 out of 10.

The primary use case is SAP applications and customized web-based applications. Now, the company is moving into Salesforce, which is something big for us.

I've worked on multiple projects and our customers are very happy using it. The company is also very happy with the tool. 

We have something called automatic processing in SAP. Previously, the company was doing it manually, which used to take hours to days. Now, we have a script that processes 200 to 300 orders per day.

Everything is integrated with SAP and the web, and it works smoothly. However, we are not yet using it for web UI testing.

• The ease of use.
• It is understandable.
• Everything is integrated.

The Capture 2.0 feature is good. Our clients like using it. It does not take long to create documentation. Once the client knows how to use it, they capture the steps, like a recording. They give it to us for putting on the best practices, and we give them back the results. Efficiency-wise, it is pretty good.

I am looking forward to a feature which will be available in the next release, version 11. The search feature, where you can search for any process that you have created. 

I would like BPP to have more filtering options during the report creation. This would make our customers happy.

The product is stable.

The technical support is very good. They are helpful and provide solutions on time and very quickly.

Our customers come up with their requirements, then we come up with a PoC for them. If it works and their happy, they go ahead with it. 

I work with customers for new implementations.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward. There are a few packages that you need to install, then you have the tutorials which guide you on how to do it. It is that easy.

Our customers are saving money.

It saves us time: approximately 50 percent.

We have cut test maintenance time by 70 to 80 percent.

Experience working with the tool and explore the features of it, because I think the Worksoft Certify is the best and can do anything.

All the different kinds of recording features (learn) on the different technology platforms such as Java, SAP, and HTML are its most valuable features.

It facilitates 80% of our regression tests.

We have had problems with an external cloud service (technology is Adobe Flex).

I have used this solution for two years.

There were no stability issues.

There were no scalability issues.

The technical support level is quite high. We are very pleased with its flexibility of services and response time on issues.

Previously, we just had manual testings.

We had quite a slow implementation. The process has given us time to learn and do things in the right way. We have also received good support when we experienced any issues.

The consultant's rate is very high but Worksoft is quite flexible.

We did do a PoC and compared it with other products from SAP and HPE.

Take your time, do a business case and plan from the beginning as to how your organization will work with the test automation.

In the beginning, there will be different technical issues between Worksoft and your business application, which will take some time to fix. You also need good internal support from the people who know the business application. Support from the managers is a must.

Parameter-driven action steps (no programming): Able to interact with all application objects, as well as execute all logical, mathematical and text manipulations, with clearly defined parameter-driven action steps. These features, and the basic structure and framework, eliminate the confusion of building a framework for every test. The framework is inherent with Certify.

Certify is built on a database where all components are indexed for easy usability and reusability. This concept is difficult to manage with most other tools where tests and components of tests are very possibly on different servers, workstations, and folders.

Process and data RecordSet coupling feature: You can import lengthy spreadsheets and, with the framework of Certify, then extract only test data needed by attaching that one imported spreadsheet RecordSet to your executable process and, with just one action step in the process, write to the RecordSet, and build only the test data you need. This feature of a Certify process does automatically read and process the next row of data in the spreadsheet RecordSet without any programming. And the feature of a Write action will write all the variables associated with a RecordSet with just one write action step.

Point and click on application objects will automatically create an action step referencing the Object's Attributes and with a variety of actions automatically promoted for selection based on your application object type. This means minimal guess work on how to interact with an object.

Easy transition during execution between application development disciplines. Go to SAP, Web, Java, mainframe, or any discipline, all in the same test execution.

Easy interaction with DOS files during execution.

Of course, one of the benefits is, we are able to complete and maintain more automation.

The biggest benefit for me has been that, because the automation is basically 'event-driven-executable-documentation', it has been easy to enhance my lengthy end-to-end tests with restart capability.

It has also been easy to create automation as part of the test to find, or create data as part of the test execution. This has enabled us to instantly run a test again without the delay of manually finding and populating input RecordSet data. When you are on the clock to complete regression testing for production implementation, this is critical; that you don't have any delay to rerun.

Certify has been in perpetual improvement mode since it's inception.

Although I don't think it would be easy, being able to edit and change an action and logic flow in mid-test execution would be nice. Of course, with event-driven execution, this would be a bit of a reach.

I’m not an expert on compliers however I do have a background as an Assembler coder. I believe most applications now are event driven and most, if not all, automation tools are Interpretive, compiled at execution time. Certify is Interpretive as well as having only parameter driven source (no programming syntax). During execution, the processer is using the Interpretive version of each step, not the actual source created by the developer. Linking back to that original source and maintaining executable sync and content would be a stretch. This is not a restriction of Certify but of any Interpretive complied automation tool. Certify does have a feature to execute just portions of its source, during editing; however, I believe that is more manageable than interrupting execution to then edit the source.

I found it difficult to conjure up enhancements to this tool possibly because I have intimate experience with Certify and have always found success using one or more features. However, there is one enhancement request that might have merit. Allow a Variable to be used in the Label parameter of the Execute Process Action. Certify has an Action step ‘Execute Process’ that has a Parameter for ‘Process Name’ and a Parameter for ‘Label’. This Action allows you to execute a sub-Process and begin that execution at any Label in the sub-Process. The Parameter for ‘Process Name’ can be a Variable containing the name of a sub-Process which can be changed based on application and logical response during execution. However, the Parameter for Label cannot be a Variable. If it could, it would provide yet another nice structural feature of Certify.

I have been a test automation developer since about 1992, but with Worksoft Certify since Jan 2000, just over 17 years.

Because of the unique framework of Certify and the extensive object, math, text and logical parameter-driven actions, there is nothing I haven't been able to accomplish with Certify and all without traditional programming or scripting.

Of course, with experience, you learn that most of the stability issues are environmental; meaning, it is usually the environment that has had to be tweaked.

I have had once where a threshold has been reached in the database for updating a component, but that basically took a phone call.

Worksoft has done a good job keeping abreast with browsers and various different development disciplines. In addition, database size has never been an issue. In fact, as test automation requirements have grown, being built on a database has certainly enabled better management of the automation reservoir of tests, as well as all the components, discipline interfaces, requirements, results, users, security, etc.

Customer support is always cordial and helpful. There is an annual Certify User Conference, where you get to actually hear presentations from customer support, technical support, and experienced users. You can actually meet and speak with the members of technical support, engineering and management on any issues.

Early on, I needed math capability and literally within a half hour, I was sent an update to allow math using a specific Set action. Now Certify has extensive math, data math, and many other numeric and text manipulation actions. Of course, since Worksoft has grown, they have instituted a formal way of communicating, which has been very successful. I am able to report any issue with an immediate response that it is being forwarded to the appropriate engineer. If I have a high priority, I get immediate attention. That has happened once during a release update, which was addressed and handled within 24 hours, and it was caused by an in-house, user-developed map.

As mentioned, I evaluated Certify against a tool I was using, AutoTester. I was also using WinRunner, Rational Robot, and Seque's Silk at the time. Those names have changed over the years. However, it was immediately evident that none of them could compare even closely with the productivity I could get with Certify. Also, because there is no syntax involved with Certify, process and actions are more like executable documentation, making maintenance much easier.

Initial setup is pretty straightforward now. Early on, I used to write my own .bat files for the install. Now, they have good documentation and you can either use a .exe or .mis file for the install and upgrade. And, I have found that support is available immediately during any installs or upgrades.

Because I have been using Certify for so long, I do my own implementation, except for local DBA support for the database. However, for brand new implementations, Worksoft has an excellent professional team for just that purpose.

I can't give you any specific dollar amount on the fly but, for instance, I was at the Certify Users Conference in the fall of 2016 and the manager from AAA Southern California mentioned that the system I architected and developed for them while training two of there business analysts back in 2006 is still being used. The system is a mainframe system for applying for insurance with quite involved requirements.

ROI tends to be substantial because business analysts can be trained in just days to be effective with Certify. With almost all other tools, you need programming experience.

Cost is always based on need. I haven't found a vendor that could give me a straight answer unless I just wanted one or two copies of a software. And, of course, the more licences you need, the more cost reduction per seat you can get.

Before choosing this product, we evaluated other options, as mentioned. We were using more than one other tool at the time at Charles Schwab and we chose Certify for it's flexibility, quickness in development, and easier maintenance.

During an R&D project to find a better automation solution at Charles Schwab (a major investment company) in January 2000, I evaluated Worksoft Certify. At the time, I had about 10 years’ experience using popular test automation tools. For the evaluation, among the considerations, I measured Certify against an automation project I recently completed. I took an IBM mainframe mutual funds order entry system I had developed with a different tool that consisted of about 10,000 syntax instructions to complete. I had been perfecting this for about one year. I used this in my R&D evaluation as a comparison. With Certify, I developed the same automation features in about 1/3 of the time and which consisted of only about 450 Certify parameter-driven actions steps. It was clear, and obvious, that going forward, development would be easier, much faster, and that maintaining 450 Certify action steps would always be easier than maintaining 10,000 syntax instructions typical with other tools.

I have been using Worksoft Certify now for over 17 years. I have Certify automation developed for HTML web, .NET, Java, PDF, mainframe, and the most beneficial, SAP. I have many test automation processes for testing SAP, including testing end to end SAP Material Management from RFQs, PR, role approvals, PO, goods receipt, payment, return product, to inventory validation. Since 2004, I continue to primarily focus on SAP test automation with Certify for easier and faster development, and easier and faster maintenance.

Is it easy to learn? Think of the concept that, with other tools, you need to develop a framework and architecture to then develop your automation in. With Certify, it is already a development framework. It is built on a database with all the features for test automation. It’s not a programming solution (no programming) just action steps with parameters against application objects and action steps with parameters for math, logic and text manipulation, etc.

And, yes it is easy to use and easy to learn. In 2016, I went to Mexico for Yazaki, the company I consult for (a major automation supplier). I went there to train two business analysts on using Certify for developing test automation for several Yazaki Web business applications.

One of the biggest benefits: I was there for only two (2) weeks and completed training of two (2) business analysts that have no programming background. Since then, they have been pretty much developing with Certify on their own, almost one year now.