Oracle Application Testing Suite vs. TestComplete

It is extremely well suited for database upgrade testing as well as major upgrades of the E-business suite applications. It is less suited for performing this for minor patching efforts.

Incentivized

To really make the most of TestComplete, at least some scripting is necessary. TestComplete works really well with clearly identifiable objects but needs some tweaking for objects that vary in e.g. quantity. We have some elements that vary, but the vast majority of UI elements have unique identifies, and those iterative elements can also be mapped to iterations of a semi-unique element (so more of a mapping of the item type that the specific item). I doubt the usability would be near as good if more items were not clearly identifiable. In our case, most are, and we handle our tests in form of nested keyword tests that occasionally also implement scripting when needed. Tedious tests like Verification of the correct presence and status of UI elements in all possible scenarios, and iterative tests of e.g. input values and combinations of such, are made easy to set up, execute and evaluate.

Incentivized

• Load testing with useful graphical interface tools to watch real time performance
• Flexible configuration for monitoring utilities
• Historical tracking for baseline performance before and after upgrades

Incentivized

• TestComplete is great for working with our non-web applications.
• TestComplete allows us to interface with our web application in a robust way.
• Despite the age of our architecture, TestComplete handles the old stuff that's been around a while as well as the newer technology when we are able to implement it.

Incentivized

• Learning Oracles testing language "OpenScript" is a challenge, and for less technical people could be a problem
• Sometimes the applications automatic updates cause more problems than they solve
• The cost of the suite is higher than some competing applications

Incentivized

• Would love to see TC be a plugin for Visual Studio. Instead of VBScript or JavaScript, to use C# or VB.NET
• Easier to set up with iOS. Android is not bad but iOS seems slow and confusing to get up and running
• Built-in PDF reading support, built in Excel API

Incentivized

We have bigger test automation pack using test complete at the same time we also think this is not good performing tool for large number of test automation scripts.

Incentivized

It is usable when you become accustomed to its quirks. Not using it for two months and then you need to re-learn the quirks for some features (but some quirks are so awful that they will never fade from your memory). So, when using it regularly, it is possible to be quite productive, if no big correction in name mapping is needed.

Incentivized

Some bugs were quickly resolved, but most UX quirks of the tool are just marked "as designed". No follow up for enhancement request.

Incentivized

If you develop a mobile application and your testing process goes in cloud, probably you will face a problem - how to implement a stable connection between your mobile devices and testing servers

Incentivized

Oracle Application Testing Suite is much more useful and we work more than ZAPTEST because it is a life cycle tool that allows us to define and manage your application test process, validate the functionality of the application and ensure that your applications work under load. Implement web applications and web services in less time while maximizing the efficiency of the tests.

Incentivized

TestComplete stacks up against them in terms of GUI and seamless performance. It records each and every step and action been performed in the application and produces a detailed report in a well-structured manner. It can connect and access seamlessly among various databases directly to speed up the testing process.

Incentivized

• Some of our applications had struggled with performing well under high load times and was adversely affecting the usage of our client services. Using Oracle Application Testing Suite we were able to diagnose some of the architectural flaws and helped make our apps more performant.

Incentivized

• On one of the applications, I've reduced the testing time from a month to five days.
• I don't always have time to create tests for new features, then I revert to manual testing.
• The Zephyr reports have given management insight on what happens in the QA department.

Incentivized