The BlazeMeter Continuous Testing Platform is a unified, end-to-end, next-generation software test automation platform built for both Agile and COE teams, from Perforce. BlazeMeter includes complete continuous testing capabilities deeply integrated into a single, intuitive workflow.
$199
per month
LoadRunner Professional
Score 8.6 out of 10
N/A
A solution simplifies performance load testing for colocated teams. With project-based capabilities, so teams can quickly identify abnormal application behavior.
N/A
Visual Studio Test Professional
Score 7.0 out of 10
N/A
An add-on for the Visual Studio IDE, Visual Studio Test Professional subscription helps teams drive quality and speed. It includes test case management and collaboration features that streamline quality control and support continuous delivery.
Most of the above tools are pretty popular in the industry. These are tools that are way cheaper compared to the industry giant LoadRunner. Yet these tools have their own limitations and drawbacks. In BlazeMeter the user load cannot be modified during the test run. JMeter and Bl…
It is well suited for applications that are mission-critical or applications that can receive high traffic/transactions at unscheduled time periods. Using the load testing feature of BlazeMeter, we can test and ascertain the capacity of the application without the drawbacks of the usual Apache JMeter load testing which depends heavily on the host system from where the load testing is performed.
Micro Focus LoadRunner and its suite of tools, specifically VuGen works wonderfully for us for all web, http/https and web service calls. We've been able to build tests for near any scenario we need with relative ease. As long as we have crafted up requirements for our scenarios / scripts to managed scope, we've had high success working with scripting and data driving. Our main tests are web service calls - typically chained together to form a full scenario with transactions measuring the journey or a similar (measure along the way) journey through a browser. For web services we will use VuGen and browser we've shifted to Tru Client I have had little-to-no experience scripting against a thick client where a ui-driven test would be required. I know its possible but quite costly due to the need to run the actual desktop client to drive tests. We've been fortunate enough to leverage http calls to represent client traffic.
It would be well suited if we used it with Azure DevOps as we can effortlessly integrate the test cases and even stories or tasks to stay on track with our work. Those test cases can even be reused across multiple projects. Using any other third-party tools, such as Jira, can be less appropriate, as it's not a Microsoft tool, and its capabilities will be limited.
Blazemeter reporting is very basic and shallow. There is no way to drill down or correlate. I can get better reports by using JMeter for free.
Blazemeter is very costly. Testing with volumes of more than 1K cu is expensive, and can be done for much cheaper if a company/team is willing to invest a bit of time to figure out how to use cloud instances and jmeter slaves, and to write a basic script to collect resulting xml output.
HP LoadRunner with new patches and releases sometimes makes no longer support older version of various protocols like Citrix, which makes the task time-consuming when using older versions of LoadRunner for some of the cases. So it should support older version as well while upgrading.
Configuring HP LoadRunner over the firewall involves lots of configuration and may be troublesome. So, there should be a script (power shell script for Windows or shell script for Linux users) to make it easy to use and with less pain.
I would like to see the RunTime Viewer of Vugen in HPLoadRunner based on the browser I selected in the run-time configuration to make it feel more realistic as a real user.
Licensing cost is very high when we need to perform a test on application for a specific group of users.
The user community of the Visual Studio Test product is weak. For instant problems with this product, it is necessary to quickly reach the source of the error.
Licence fees need to be more reasonable. License prices need to be reduced so that they can easily compete with free testing tools.
It is very usable if you are familiar with Visual Studio to begin with. If you are new to the interface, it can be a long ramp up period for Testers not used to the GUI. There is always the web option which seems to be more intuitive for many Testers.
Customer service is not that great. It's difficult to get hold of someone if an issue is supposed to be addressed on an urgent basis. No online chat service readily available.
Visual Studio Test Professional is backed up by the full support of the Microsoft Corporation. That means twenty-four/seven customer support by quality, highly-trained professionals who understand every possible issue that you have experienced before. They are nice, efficient, and highly professional. I recommend them.
In comparison with Blazemeter the closes competitor is JMeter but it has disadvantages like it is not a tool that can be use as a collaborative tool and works locally in a computer, Blazemeter is in the web so different people can access and run tests or collaborate do add, edit or delete the existent scripts.
The visual Studio Test tool is faster than other tools. Since the development and testing processes are in one tool, it is more profitable in terms of cost. It is more inconvenient to write a test case in DevOps.
The scripts created with traditional web/http protocol are not robust thus re-scripting is required after most every code drop. Troubleshooting and fixing the issue takes more time therefore in most cases we do re-scripting to keep it simple and save time.
In ideal world you would rather spend more time doing testing than scripting in that case mostly you could use an Ajax TruClient protocol. This type of script will only fail when an object in the application is removed or changed completely. This way of scripting will save you more time and helps you maintain the scripts with less re-work effort on a release basis. On the long run you will have a better ROI when you use Ajax TruClient protocol for scripting.
One of the positive ROIs of Visual Studios is the fact that it makes producing our work at a quick rate, things like Intellisense make our work get produced at a much higher rate which is good for our return of investment.
Testing by the developers has increased by 23%, we now take the time to actually test our product before we send it to our QA people.
I am not aware of any negative ROI aspects to our company that have been found.
