Azure DevOps Server (formerly TMS) Formerly Team Foundation Server vs Micro Focus UFT One Formerly HP UFT

• Reporting Integration- Azure boards provides Kanban and other dashboard, their templates for easy management of project.
• Project Pipeline- easy integration and development of CI/CD pipelines, helped in testing, releasing project artifacts.
• Version Control- Integration with Git and code IDE made it easy to share, review our code, fix bugs and do testing.

Read full review

• 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

• Can add more build templates for specific technology requirements
• Can have more features in dashboards which can help dev teams stream line their tasks and priorities
• Can have raise alarm feature in case of any sort of failure in devops pipeline execution

Read full review

• 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

• It has streamlined the pipeline and project management for our agile effort.
• It has helped our agile team get organized since that is a new methodology being leveraged within the Enterprise.
• The calendar has improved visibility into different OOOs across the project team since we all come from different departments across the larger organization.

Read full review

• 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