OpenText UFT Digital Lab vs. Selenium

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
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
Selenium
Score 8.1 out of 10
N/A
Selenium is open source software for browser automation, primarily used for functional, load, or performance testing of applications.N/A
Pricing
OpenText UFT Digital LabSelenium
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
OpenText UFT Digital LabSelenium
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Best Alternatives
OpenText UFT Digital LabSelenium
Small Businesses
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.9 out of 10
BrowserStack
BrowserStack
Score 8.3 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.9 out of 10
ReadyAPI
ReadyAPI
Score 8.1 out of 10
Enterprises
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.9 out of 10
ignio AIOps
ignio AIOps
Score 8.1 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
OpenText UFT Digital LabSelenium
Likelihood to Recommend
9.0
(2 ratings)
9.2
(55 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
9.0
(1 ratings)
9.2
(6 ratings)
Usability
-
(0 ratings)
8.8
(6 ratings)
Support Rating
-
(0 ratings)
8.3
(11 ratings)
Implementation Rating
-
(0 ratings)
9.0
(3 ratings)
User Testimonials
OpenText UFT Digital LabSelenium
Likelihood to Recommend
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
Open Source
When you have to test the UI and how it behaves when certain actions are performed, you need something that can automate the browsers. This is where Selenium comes to the rescue. If you have to test APIs and not the frontend (UI), I would recommend going with other libraries that support HTTP Requests. Selenium is good only when you have no choice but to run the steps on a browser.
Read full review
Pros
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
Open Source
  • For any web based UI automation, Selenium is the best tool out there to automate your tests.
  • It supports multiple coding languages like Java, Python, Ruby, C# etc.. to choose from.
  • There is a huge community of users and can get many answers on StackOverFlow.
  • It has lot of other plugins to make your tests even more efficient.
Read full review
Cons
OpenText
  • Most of our problems are with the lengthy onboarding process with iOS devices.
  • Occasionally Android devices will disconnect themselves.
Read full review
Open Source
  • Selenium is pretty user-friendly but sometimes tests tend to flake out. I'd say roughly one out of twenty tests yields a false positive.
  • Selenium software cannot read images. This is a minor negative because a free plug-in is available from alternate sources.
  • Slowness may be a minor factor with Selenium, though this is an issue with basically any testing software since waiting on a site to execute JavaScript requires the browser to wait for a particular action.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
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
Open Source
We love this product mainly because of its high customization abilities and the ease of use. Moreover, its free and can be learned easily through online communities and videos. The tests are more consistent and reliable as compared to Manual tests. It has enabled us to test a large number of features all in one go, which would have impossible through manual tests. The reports generated at the end of the tests are really helpful for the QA and the development teams to get a fair view of the application.
Read full review
Usability
OpenText
No answers on this topic
Open Source
As I mentioned earlier, the reason I use Selenium is because there is a fairly widespread community of users, and user support services are at a good level. because the application is open source, it works on many platforms (Windows, Linux, IOS) without any problems. In addition, it gives us a lot of options for writing functional tests. For errors that we receive through the application, we can easily find the reasons for errors in the forums.
Read full review
Support Rating
OpenText
No answers on this topic
Open Source
Selenium does not have technical support available easily. You have to go through forums to get the information you need. However, there are excellent forums out there that make it easy to troubleshoot. The open-source flexibility makes it difficult to have dedicated support.
Read full review
Implementation Rating
OpenText
No answers on this topic
Open Source
We did everything we needed to use it. Now we can execute our tests on different operational systems and browsers running few tests simultaneously. We also implemented Appium framework to execute our tests on mobile devices, such as iPhones, iPads, Android phones and tablets. We use SauceLabs for our test execution and Jenkins for continuous integration.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
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
Open Source
At the time of adoption, there were not many other alternatives that were even close to being competitive when it comes to browser testing. As far as I know now to this day, there is still little competition to Selenium for what it does. Any other browser-based testing still utilises Selenium to interact with the browser.
Read full review
Return on Investment
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
Open Source
  • There hasn’t been a downside to using it yet other than we’ve got to update the programs we create for each change.
  • This has saved us hundreds of hours of manpower by allowing our automation engineer to rapid fire tests.
  • We are able to screenshot and save entire sites before and after launch with a program the automation engineer created
  • We can compare large volumes of data against data in excel docs with a program created using Selenium
Read full review
ScreenShots