OpenText UFT One vs. SpecFlow

The tool has evolved to be the market leader in paid GUI testing, at last count, there are over a dozen add-ins (not including subtypes) that can be selected at startup based upon the technology of the application being tested. This includes the standard web types to new mobile applications. It can be plugged into your development tool of choice and reports the results to whatever level you desire.

Incentivized

It is best suited for implementing the automated test cases in a human readable form so it's easy for non-technical members of the team and stakeholders to understand the test cases, features and the functionalities of the application. Automation of Integration tests and End to End tests are good use case. It is less appropriate or situations where the focus is only on the writing and maintenance of unit tests.

Incentivized

• Integration & Support: a) The way tool integrates with other platforms like .net, mainframe is amazing. It Supports new and legacy web technologies, terminal emulators, and Windows thick client applications. b) It Supports Continuous integration by integrating with Jenkins, Git etc. c) UFT supports cross browser testing & it supports all main browsers like IE, Firefox, Chrome and Apple Safari. d)It’s compatibility with ALM can help store automation execution results back in ALM & even allows us to schedule the automation execution at required date/time.
• Amazing Features: UFT has so many features but at the same time, it is quite easy to learn & it doesn’t take long to train staff on it. Few amazing features which adds lot of value while scripting are:
• a) Test Combinations Generator (TCG) - It helps to create test configurations by using the parameters in tests and their possible values to create multiple possible data combinations.
• b) Insight Recording – It recognizes controls based on their appearance and not their native properties. This can be useful to test controls from an environment that UFT does not support or even from a remote computer running a non-Windows operating system. When UFT runs the test or component, it recognizes the controls in the application by matching them to the images saved with each of the Insight test objects.
• c) UFT has built in reporting features as well as allowing for customized output files showing exactly where a test step failed along with the timestamp.
• UFT supports BPT (Business Process Testing), a component-based testing framework which provides strong and efficient platform to test complete business process manually and automatically combines manual and automation tests with less duplication and its component reusability feature makes the testing process very fast.
• It helps improving efficiency in regression testing and functional testing, in that we automate a lot of repeatable tasks.
• Organization doesn’t need to have a skilled coder to write a basic automation script with UFT.

Incentivized

• Versatility to be used in combination with different kinds of automated testing like automated performance testing, API testing, UI testing etc. I use JavaScript, Selenium, C#, email testing libraries, database testing libraries in combination with BDD with SpecFlow. I am able to use all these with SpecFlow to make my automation framework to be able to automate any kind of automated testing.
• It provides different widely used runner options like NUnit, XUnit etc. Before I started to work on establishing proper test automation in my workplace, the previous automation framework (non-BDD based) as well as unit tests used NUnit runner. The transition to using BDD was smooth because we could use the same runner and there were no compatibility issues.
• The auto-complete feature is good. I use it with Visual Studio as well as Rider and I don't have to recall the entire Gherkin statements. I just type a few words and the entire Gherkin statement implemented in framework is auto-suggested by SpecFlow. It saves time and context switching.

Incentivized

• Various formats of reporting support should be possible. Right now UFT supports exporting reports in either HTML or PDF in short or detailed format. If exporting reports could be extended to Excel, CSV, XML, XSLT, MHT formats that would be greatly appreciated.
• They should improve performance. There will be performance degradation on the test environment due to long continuous executions of automation scripts which leads to inconsistency of results, a better way to resolve this problem should be addressed at some point.
• Consistency during execution should be maintained.

Incentivized

• SpecFlow does not accepts optional input variables in the methods defined during Gherkin statement implementation. Cucumber supports optional input variables in the methods defined during Gherkin statement implementation.
• The tests identified while using SpecFlow with NUnit removes all white spaces in the scenario names. It makes the tests less readable. If the white spaces are not auto-removed, it would be much better for readability as well as their actual identification in the repository.

Incentivized

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

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

UFT has the advantages of supporting different types of technologies. Different competitive tools were not able to support the wide range of technologies which UFT does. UFT has a strong history and has been ranked one among all the Test Automation tools for quite some time. There is a wide and strong community across the internet.

Incentivized

SpecFlow is .Net based which supports C#. Behave is Python based. Cucumber is Java based. Ghost Inspector is no-code based but provides very limited testing features. We wanted to implement BDD so we rued out using Ghost Inspector. Most of the developers in my team are C# experts so it was decided for everyone's comfort to go for SpecFlow rather than Behave or Cucumber. It's import to have technical experts in the language of the automation framework because there are many situations where the solutions to the test automation needs are not straightforward and implementing those requires expertise in the related programming language.

Incentivized

• Roi on uft takes time as licensing cost pretty high. I would say you will have to wait for atleast 2 years to see roi value
• Uft needs time to integrate into the current business as it has few limitations
• Uft can be right weight so it is easily installed on premise or used from cloud so it can be accessed from anywhere

Incentivized

• Everyone stays on the same page regarding the behavior of existing functionalities whether it be technical or non-technical individuals. So there is less need for multiple people to get involved which saves time and thus money.
• Reusing the same code through the implemented Gherkin statement saves test automation time and thus reduces cost.
• We combine SpecFlow with other opensource testing technologies to make our automation framework more versatile which further saves costs for us.

Incentivized