BrowserStack is a test platform built for developers and QAs to expand test coverage, scale and optimize testing with cross-browser, real device cloud, accessibility, visual testing, test management, and test observability. BrowserStack states it currently powers over a billion tests a year for customers who include Amazon, Paypal, Well Fargo Bank, Nvidia, MongoDB, Pfizer, GE, Discovery, React JS, Apache, JQuery and several others rely on BrowserStack to test their web and mobile apps.
$0
per month Unlimited users and 5000 free screenshots
OpenText UFT One
Score 7.8 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
BrowserStack
OpenText UFT One
Editions & Modules
Percy - Free
$0
per month Unlimited users and 5000 free screenshots
App Percy - Free
$0
per month 5000 free screenshots and 100 minutes of infrastructure
It is one of the product which each software organisation should include in their end to end product development journey. I have explored other products in this category and I can proudly say that BrowserStack is a clear winner in terms of its Features, Performance and Product …
I didn't have problems working with BrowserStack. The tool is stable, there are a lot of different devices and OS. It's really useful. I only had a problem in the past while working with a company that had geolocation activated on the app. The app only works in the USA, and I was in Brazil. I faced many many issues working on this circumstances. I tried to get in touch with BrowserStack, but I leave the company before get the problem solved. But that one was the only big problem that I've faced while using BrowserStack.
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.
BrowserStack App Automate dashboard gives us video, screenshots and logs of what exactly happened during the test run. This helps us easily analyse failures in our automation test and figure out the root cause for failures.
BrowserStack App Live provides us with lot of devices to test on. This is specifically useful in case of high end iPhone devices which are costly for us to procure in house.
BrowserStack App Automate provides parallel threads which can be shared across multiple teams. This has helped us scale our mobile test automation effort across the organisation.
In house mobile lab might be cost effective initially but when it comes to maintaining it and add new devices as and when it comes in market makes it less cost effective than cloud solution like BrowserStack
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.
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.
This decisions mostly taken by senior management at VP and CEO level, they also need approval from many other teams like dev, design according to the use, and finance due to competitive cost, They do check other product as well, and I am just a single person from QA team, and not a decision maker
It integrates directly in internal networks and local development. The point and click interface of choosing your device, pick the browser/version and you have a working emulation of that exact environment. What else could you ask for? I've set our least computer savvy users up with BrowserStack for testing in minutes. It feels like it's just part of your local environemnt.
The tests are fast considering the fact that they're Appium tests. I've seen tests reliably pass or fail when they're supposed to, with next to zero issues on the BrowserStack side of things. Tests launch only seconds after I kick off them off from my CLI.
I'm saying a 10 for support for BrowserStack only based on feedback from the development team. I myself have never had to reach out to support for any questions or issues, but others in the company have. From my conversations with them, the support was fantastic and had been a pleasure working with the BrowserStack team.
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.
Yes, it was online training on meet, and trainer looks like skilled and technical strong, he has covered end to end all the features and he has answers all the queries. because of this trainings we are able to implement it by our own in the organization, thank you for support and training.
It was a quick training from the support of browserstack, it was nice and easy to understand, thanks again for the support given by the team. and regularly I used to receive mails for training from support for any new feature they launch, I was able to spread same training to all my team and dev.
It was new learning for me, till the time I was not aware of such tools are available for manual CBT testing and for automation integration caue I was using some VM for testing, it has increase my knowledge and skill set. It was a fun while implementation and I enjoyed it.
BrowserStack's library of devices and browsers is way bigger than Chrome DevTools. Additionally, I find that BrowserStack is more accurate than Chrome DevTools in regards to how pages render on the various devices I need to test on. Overall, BrowserStack is far better than Chrome DevTools.
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.
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.
