What advice do you have for others considering SmartBear TestComplete?

The solution handles application changes very well. You can add or modify your existing test cases, which is a good feature. One of the solution's major AI capabilities is self-healing, which supports my test activity. The solution's AI capability increased the accuracy of the element identifier. I would recommend the solution to other users. Besides the cost, SmartBear TestComplete is a good solution for web and mobile. Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

Speaking about the scripting flexibility that the product provides, I would say that users don't need to write all the scripts manually. As users, we don't need to know a lot of programming since SmartBear TestComplete serves as a low-code and no-code tool. With minimum development knowledge, one can use the tool. One may need the development knowledge for certain advanced things, but more or less, anyone can easily use the product's automation. The tool supports AI-driven testing scenarios. The product suggests to its users that during automation, we have to catch UI elements, which is actually an easy process. Speaking about the product's integration capabilities, I would say that we are not using any CI/CD pipelines at the moment. Integration is completely different when it comes to SmartBear TestComplete. In the future, some companies hope to integrate MartBear TestComplete with Jenkins. SmartBear TestComplete is a good tool for application automation. The tool can be used without much experience in the development area. The product can be described as a low-code and no-code tool. I rate the tool an eight out of ten.

I would recommend it. However, I don't think I'd recommend TestComplete for companies heavily focused on AI-driven testing. I don't think it has robust capabilities in that area yet, though that may change in future releases. Overall, I would rate the solution a nine out of ten.

I highly recommend TestComplete to other users. From an organizational standpoint, writing all the automation scripts can be time-consuming, and when the key person responsible for them departs, it's challenging to find someone who can understand and work with the code. TestComplete offers codeless automation, making it accessible for anyone to learn quickly. I would rate it an eight out of ten for its overall features and the support it provides in various aspects.

I would not recommend the solution to those who plan to use it. I rate the overall product a seven out of ten.

Speaking about whether I am satisfied with the product or not, I can say that we have faced challenges that SmartBear TestComplete doesn't resolve, but I think we need other tools, especially around API layer testing, and that is what we're looking into at the moment. We are not particularly switching from SmartBear TestComplete to some other solution. I am just looking for other tools. We are not switching to other solutions since we have been using SmartBear TestComplete for a long time, and we have invested time, money, resource, skill training, and all of such things. We are not necessarily going to switch to some other solution on a whim. From my perspective, I came into my company's project relatively early, so I think it's a good time to start looking at other areas and potentially other tools that would allow us to expand in areas where we currently either don't have the absolute right tool for the job or could do better. It is important to consider that every tool has its own limitations, and hence some research needs to be done. To be honest, I have only just started, and I haven't had enough time to go deep enough into the details of it. Overall, I rate the product six out of ten.

We had some sort of partnership with the product. I'm not sure which version we're using. The version we're using is likely two years old. I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

The advice that I would give would be to make sure you dedicate some time and resources to laying out how you want to structure the test cases first. I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

I'm a customer and end-user. You can buy either cloud or on-premises versions. If a user is testing behavioral actions, then SmartBear is a very good product to go to. However, if you have to do extreme test data testing and it's a big scenario, and it is a lot of evaluation and test data dependency, then I would not recommend this tool. I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

I'm a reseller. I'm not coming from any organization as a consumer who is consuming TestComplete features. Actually, I'm a solution architect who is demonstrating the features of the tool to others. While I tend to look at client requirements before recommending any solution if it did fit in with a client's need I would definitely recommend the product. It's very reliable. I would rate the solution eight out of ten. While there are some gaps, we've been mostly happy with its capabilities.

When it comes to automation, the fundamental aspects are the stabilization factor, how easy it is to automate, how much is the coverage, and how much are you able to cover with respect to an application. There will be always areas that cannot be automated. The coverage, stabilization, and ease to automate are the areas that have to be improved. The better the pricing and improved pricing models, the more it will attract more customers. I rate SmartBear TestComplete a seven out of ten.

I would rate SmartBear TestComplete a six out of ten.

My company is a partner of TestComplete. I am a senior test architect in our organization. If a company has an ecosystem and they need to automate the web, desktop, or mobile, then TestComplete is the right tool. Even if they need enterprise application automation, it's very easy. On top of that, using a scriptless approach will save a lot of time. However, users are not limited to that. They can use Python, JavaScript, VBScript, or other kinds of options. You can import external Python libraries inside it, which will give additional capabilities to the tool. It's been very useful. Overall, I would rate it at a nine out of ten.

My advice to others is: If you're looking for speed, configuration consistency, and accuracy of tests with fantastic results, go get TestComplete. If you're starting with it, you'll see how much more you can expand on it.

We're just customers and end-users. I'd advise new users to take a look at what they need. They need to know if they need something that can test on desktop or on mobile, et cetera. This is a good solution if you need something that works with Windows, for example. I would rate the solution eight out of ten.

Price-wise, feature-wise, its ability to integrate with other products, and of course, scalability-wise, it's great. I would absolutely recommend TestComplete to others. On a scale from one to ten, I would give TestComplete a rating of seven.

I would definitely recommend this solution. I would rate SmartBear TestComplete an eight out of ten.

We do a lot of consulting and training services for SmartBear. We try to educate the users in terms of the new features available in TestComplete so that they can do some smart automation. It's not just for automating some scenarios, you can optimize a lot of your effort. On a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of nine.

TestComplete is a good product compared to other options that are on the market. I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. If you compare it with competitors, the object identification needs to be improved. It also needs to ensure that going forward it supports new technologies. We are seeing a lot of new technologies coming up. It's important that test companies support these new advancements. If they do, then it will give testers a reason to try them out and hopefully adopt the solution. It's a win-win. The solution is also great for language flexibility. It's important to support a number of languages to help increase user adoption. I'd recommend this solution to other organizations. It's one of three I'd recommend for sure based on the pricing and feature offering it has. Of course, this is just a recommendation n terms of a commercial tool. Open-source tool recommendations are a whole other question.

I'm currently working with the latest version of the solution. My advice to others is to just decide if this tool is usable for your requirements. I spent a lot of time developing some tests, but then I understood that we actually needed more platforms. That's why we will switch to another tool. That's also why it's important to check your organization's requirements. Otherwise, like us, you may need to switch. I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

The solution is pretty good. Other options to use are TestComplete, and, for negative scenarios, Katalon Studios. I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

I'm using the desktop version of the solution. Right now, I'm working with TestComplete, and will compare it to another product called Squish. Once I've compared the two, I'll make recommendations to my customers and our company about whether or not to buy the complete solution. I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. I'd rate it higher if the solution offered the ability to test on Mac OS.

This product is quite mature, able to compete with other products in the market, and I would highly recommend it. Overall, we're very pleased with the implementation. My advice to anybody who is considering this solution is to do a PoC and try this solution out. They can always reach out to me for help, and I can assist. The biggest lesson that I have learned from using this solution is that there is a lot of hard work going on behind the scenes with this tool, to make each customer's journey easier. This tool is simple to implement and easy to use. If you don't have much time to do a lot of reading then it is still easy to take each case and adopt it quickly. I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We haven't fully evaluated this solution, although I know that they have made a lot of updates since I worked on it the last time. The results of this evaluation will set the standard for other projects. We are creating the basis for everything. As things progress, it will be me creating the test, but it will be executed on several machines. I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.