TrustRadius: an HG Insights company

Save this comparison

Save this comparison

Add Product

Recommended Comparisons

    Overview
    ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price

    OpenText UFT One

    Score8 out of 10
    N/AUnified 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

    BitBar

    Score6.4 out of 10
    N/ABitBar allows users to test applications across the latest and most popular real browsers and devices. Users can scale testing by increasing test coverage and decreasing test execution time by running automated tests in parallel across browsers and devices. BitBar integrates with the user's current tech stack or CI/CD pipeline. Key Features: * BitBar offers one cloud for all testing platforms whether it be web, native, or hybrid applications. * Test an application across real…

    $39

    per month

    Pricing
    OpenText UFT OneBitBar
    Editions & Modules
    No answers on this topic
    No answers on this topic
    Offerings
    Pricing Offerings
    OpenText UFT OneBitBar
    Free Trial
    NoYes
    Free/Freemium Version
    NoNo
    Premium Consulting/Integration Services
    NoNo
    Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
    Additional Details—Enterprise packages are available for larger teams and customers.
    More Pricing Information
    Community Pulse
    OpenText UFT OneBitBar
    Considered Both Products
    OpenText
    No answer on this topic
    SmartBear
    No answer on this topic
    Key User Insights
    Would buy again
    No answers on this topic
    83%
    Would buy again
    5 Answers
    Delivers good value for the price
    No answers on this topic
    100%
    Delivers good value for the price
    5 Answers
    Happy with the feature set
    No answers on this topic
    100%
    Happy with the feature set
    6 Answers
    Lived up to sales and marketing promises
    No answers on this topic
    No answers on this topic
    Implementation went as expected
    No answers on this topic
    100%
    Implementation went as expected
    6 Answers
    Best Alternatives
    OpenText UFT OneBitBar
    Small Businesses
    TestComplete
    Score8 out of 10
    TestMu AI (Formerly LambdaTest)
    Score8.9 out of 10
    Medium-sized Companies
    ReadyAPI
    Score6.1 out of 10
    TestMu AI (Formerly LambdaTest)
    Score8.9 out of 10
    Enterprises
    SoapUI Open Source
    Score8.3 out of 10
    TestMu AI (Formerly LambdaTest)
    Score8.9 out of 10
    All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
    User Ratings
    OpenText UFT OneBitBar
    Likelihood to Recommend
    8.0
    (12 ratings)
    8.2
    (6 ratings)
    Usability
    7.0
    (1 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    Support Rating
    8.0
    (1 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    User Testimonials
    OpenText UFT OneBitBar
    Likelihood to Recommend
    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.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    SmartBear
    CrossBrowserTesting is a great tool to use when you have a new page or new content that you want to test on an array of devices/browsers. In the diverse online world nowadays, it is nearly impossible to ensure optimization for every case. CBT allows you to get closer to that goal.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Pros
    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.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    SmartBear
    • Allows me to test on our development server with ease which is behind a firewall.
    • Using automation for my tests.
    • Screenshots of the problems on each page.
    • Ability to jump between screen sizes quickly.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Cons
    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.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    SmartBear
    • Test case support is somewhat limited in customization ability.
    • Not a unique problem to them (or their 'fault'), but content behind VPN or intranet cannot be scanned.
    • Pricing with tier level and features can sometimes be confusing (ie. what is and what is not included).
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Usability
    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
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    SmartBear
    No answers on this topic
    Support Rating
    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.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    SmartBear
    No answers on this topic
    Alternatives Considered
    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.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    SmartBear
    Selenium: 1. Selenium is Open source tool 2. Needs proper framework development and integration with multiple 3rd party tools 3. Not much secure 4. Needs scripting knowledge for people working on it 5. takes time and effort CrossBrowser Testing: 1. Licensed , so secure 2. Less time , less effort 3. Quick results 4. No scripting language knowledge needed 5. More coverage 6. Without any framework creation also we can test on multiple devices/browsers
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Return on Investment
    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.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    SmartBear
    • By using CrossBrowserTesting we are saving many hours a week in manual work hours.
    • Our automated Selenium tests run in a fraction of the time it takes to manually test our components, so we can spend more time building great user experiences and less time triaging bugs.
    Read full review
    ScreenShots