Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
JMeter
Score 8.2 out of 10
N/A
JMeter, from Apache, is a load and performance testing tool.
$0
OpenText UFT Digital Lab
Score 9.0 out of 10
N/A
Formerly from Micro Focus, a centralized lab of real mobile devices and emulators. With remote access, developers and testers can develop, debug, test, monitor, and optimize mobile apps from anywhere.N/A
OpenText UFT One
Score 8.0 out of 10
N/A
Unified Functional Testing (UFT, formerly known as HP UFT and before that QuickTest Professional or HP QTP) is a functional and performance testing tool acquired by Micro Focus from Hewlett-Packard Enterprise, now from OpenText.N/A
Pricing
Apache JMeterOpenText UFT Digital LabOpenText UFT One
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
JMeterOpenText UFT Digital LabOpenText UFT One
Free Trial
NoNoNo
Free/Freemium Version
YesNoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Apache JMeterOpenText UFT Digital LabOpenText UFT One
Considered Multiple Products
JMeter

No answer on this topic

OpenText UFT Digital Lab
Chose OpenText UFT Digital Lab
We selected UFT Mobile mainly for its easy tie-in to our existing automation and other tools we use from Micro Focus. We did briefly look at some other options, but the ability to instantly tie in, and also allow future changes (if we desired) like Appium.
Chose OpenText UFT Digital Lab
HP Mobile Center stacks well against solutions like Mobile Labs Device Connect, Perfecto Mobile and Device Anywhere. Its native integration with HP ALM and HP UFT makes it a clear choice for team already using those solutions. HP Mobile Center also provides extension to Amazon …
OpenText UFT One
Chose OpenText UFT One
  • Alignment/Integration with other products like ALM, Sprinter, Mobile Center
  • Knowledge availability
  • Dedicated vendor support
Features
Apache JMeterOpenText UFT Digital LabOpenText UFT One
Load Testing
Comparison of Load Testing features of Product A and Product B
Apache JMeter
7.2
24 Ratings
17% below category average
OpenText UFT Digital Lab
-
Ratings
OpenText UFT One
-
Ratings
End to end performance management9.021 Ratings00 Ratings00 Ratings
Integrated performance data8.522 Ratings00 Ratings00 Ratings
Deployment model flexibility7.521 Ratings00 Ratings00 Ratings
Real time monitoring6.521 Ratings00 Ratings00 Ratings
Automated anomaly detection4.417 Ratings00 Ratings00 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Apache JMeterOpenText UFT Digital LabOpenText UFT One
Small Businesses

No answers on this topic

GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.7 out of 10
BrowserStack
BrowserStack
Score 8.5 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
ReadyAPI
ReadyAPI
Score 6.2 out of 10
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.7 out of 10
ReadyAPI
ReadyAPI
Score 6.2 out of 10
Enterprises
ReadyAPI
ReadyAPI
Score 6.2 out of 10
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.7 out of 10
SoapUI Open Source
SoapUI Open Source
Score 8.4 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Apache JMeterOpenText UFT Digital LabOpenText UFT One
Likelihood to Recommend
8.5
(39 ratings)
9.0
(2 ratings)
8.0
(12 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
8.6
(12 ratings)
9.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Usability
6.5
(3 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
7.0
(1 ratings)
Availability
1.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Performance
8.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
10.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
8.0
(1 ratings)
Online Training
1.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Apache JMeterOpenText UFT Digital LabOpenText UFT One
Likelihood to Recommend
Apache
JMeter is well suited for Java applications where the user can script the scenario once and make changes to accommodate for as many numbers of users for load test execution. The image and selection of any files or exporting files scenario is handled well.
It is less appropriate to test Ajax applications where it is required to script click per use.
Read full review
OpenText
UFT mobile works really well if/when you need physical devices under your management. Managing physical devices in any setup is an interesting undertaking due to the various considerations per device. There are really nice best practices, for example using managed USB switches like the one from Cambrionix, that can help make for a really good experience. For us, we only have 1 application at this time that has frequent updates/releases. We are able to test out these with confidence using our suite of real/on-campus devices managed and made available by the UFT Mobile product.
Read full review
OpenText
UFT is well suited if the price is not an issue, and if the requirement is about testing different technologies. If the application is based on Legacy platforms like Siebel or Mainframe, UFT fares quite well. For low cost web-based projects, there are other cheap and open source tools available. If it is about API testing or Mobile Testing, it is better to use other tools like TOSCA.
Read full review
Pros
Apache
  • Easy of use - in generate load like HTTP requests, and processing/analyzing the responses. No coding is necessary at the basic level, just need to understand load testing and the infrastructure being tested.
  • Automatic management of things like cookies to help with session state support - so you don't specifically have to worry about it or handle it
  • Lots of testing/configuration options to suit your needs in making the right load generation (sampling requests), and analyzing the results, including any pre and post processing of the results first. Things like the Beanshell/BSF pre/post processors, response assertion, regular expression extractor, XPath extractor, CSV data set config
  • There is a JMeter cloud service called BlazeMeter that I think would be useful for those that need to scale up high load without provisioning their own systems. I've not personally tried it though, but I recently attended a meetup presentation that highlighted nice useful features that BlazeMeter provides. One should evaluate the service if they are considering JMeter and need to expand beyond existing hardware resources.
Read full review
OpenText
  • Remote access to real devices within your organization network as compared to public devices library offering, where their is a risk of exposing pre-production builds outside the organization.
  • "Factory built like" integration with HP ALM, HP Sprinter, HP UFT and HP Network Virtualization.
  • Ability to mimic real world conditions in a controlled environment in the devices of your choice.
  • Removed the guess work out of using emulators
  • Able to extend automation to mobile testing using HP UFT.
Read full review
OpenText
  • The simple front end will allow novice users to easily grasp the basics of automation and give them confidence to try things for themselves.
  • UFT can scale up and run across multiple machines from a single controller, such as ALM, enabling hundreds of tests to be executed overnight.
  • There is an active support community out there, both official HPE based and independent users. This means if you do encounter a problem there is always someone out there to help you.
  • The later versions have many add-ins to plug in to other tools within the QA world.
  • Expert users are able to utilise the many native functions and also build their own to get the most out of the tool and impress people as they walk past and see the magic happening on the screen.
  • UFT also has LeanFT bundled with it, allowing automated testing at the api level - if you can convince the developers to let you in there.
Read full review
Cons
Apache
  • Jmeter requires many tweaks with respect to its configuration file and thread properties. users need to edit theses files themselves. There could be some interface where we can edit this fields.
  • Jmeter cannot handle more threads and hangs up when we increase the number of threads. This causes lot of inconvenience. In these situations, user can be notified that such change would be lead to slow performance so that user can do as required. The same appears when we try to view huge files on graph listener.
  • Jmeter should optimize the read and write access to output csv since it acts as overhead to the I/O performance. This affects our test results for the application which we are testing.
Read full review
OpenText
  • Most of our problems are with the lengthy onboarding process with iOS devices.
  • Occasionally Android devices will disconnect themselves.
Read full review
OpenText
  • Its licensing cost is very high making it a very expensive tool. due to this many organisations are exploring options of license free tools like Selenium for automation. Though learning curve is large in case of Selenium but it is very cost effective & you an get lot of support online for Selenium.
  • Though the scripting time is less since its easy to create automation scripts, the execution time is relatively higher as it takes the lot of CPU & RAM.
  • Though UFT is quite stable but during long execution cycles we do get frequent browser crashing issues.
  • In terms of costing TestComplete is also one option which is not free but comes with modular pricing. You can buy what you need, when you need.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
Apache
Price, Wiki and user sharing. Having access to the information provided by the developers and other open source providers is key for me. The ability to share information and get answers directly is very important to success in software testing. And the price of this product currently is amazing. Too many companies charge way too much money for products that are far behind in their value and pertinence
Read full review
OpenText
The tool continues to meet our expectations and has shown that they are continually evolving the product with new features that benefit us. The most recent new feature was the auto-signing/packaging of iOS apps from the server to allow native interaction of features like biometrics. Prior this was a lengthy exercise.
Read full review
OpenText
No answers on this topic
Usability
Apache
The purpose related to performance and load testing through Apache JMeter works fine but the usability of the tool should be improved quite a lot. If someone starts with the Jmeter fresh without prior experience, they need to put more efforts in understanding the tool. The UI is not that great which is the main reason not to give high rating on usability.
Read full review
OpenText
No answers on this topic
OpenText
The ui is clean but there are lots of setting snd options which one must be fully aware so it will aid him/her during scripting
Read full review
Support Rating
Apache
I have been using JMeter for the last year. By using this tool, you can make sure the system will work under varied loads. It helps us to simulate real time scenarios by creating required virtual users and make sure the application will work under load. Perform load, stress, and stability testing using JMeter.
Read full review
OpenText
No answers on this topic
OpenText
HPE are quick to reply and it's possible to get through to the actual developers shuold the case warrent it. Their online system allows updates and tracking of all incedents raised.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
Apache
I have used LoadRunner and Silkperformer, and so far Jmeter turns out be the easiest to use of all these. While each of them have their own ROI, Jmeter can be picked by anyone in hours and start testing within a day. While with other tools, we need to get license, install them (takes a while) and setup tests and firewalls, etc.
Read full review
OpenText
HP Mobile Center stacks well against solutions like Mobile Labs Device Connect, Perfecto Mobile and Device Anywhere. Its native integration with HP ALM and HP UFT makes it a clear choice for team already using those solutions. HP Mobile Center also provides extension to Amazon Device Library.
Read full review
OpenText
1. It works solid for automate SAP and S/4 Hana applications and Fiori too. 2. Teams are well versed about UFT One 3. Able to handle maintained execution results 4. Publish Automation execution results in well manner to the leadership team/stake holders 5. More help content available 6. Able to understand non technical resources about normal view.
Read full review
Return on Investment
Apache
  • Good ROI on improving the performance of the application.
  • Finding issues in the performance.
  • Benchmark the performance results.
  • CON: Need skillset to create and maintain the scripts in Java.
  • Scripts are reusable and it is executed by any user.
  • Need Client and Server setup to execute the scripts.
Read full review
OpenText
  • Efficient use of the devices. Reduced the idle time.
  • Better control over access and user management. Testing within our controlled environments.
  • Better control of device matrix.
  • Faster testing cycles. Early design bugs to development teams. Real devices means, less guess work.
Read full review
OpenText
  • Reduces the total workload of keeping the team to test older (regression) functionality. QA testers can concentrate on ad-hoc and exploratory testing, saving time and effort across the entire project.
  • Has built a better infrastructure for the client applications on which we can rely on for stability and providing regression results for any new features being developed.
  • Led the applications a step closer to implementing agile practices and DevOps across the entire organization. Thus, providing a better turnaround time of new features to the customers and less maintenance headaches for the BAU team to address.
Read full review
ScreenShots