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 7.6 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
When it comes to cross-device testing, or what can be said as Live testing, BrowserStack is the best tool for testing with different devices with different OSs at a time. It gives users the liberty to test on iPhone, iPad, or Android devices and check the UI on all different …
Nothing else actually. BrowserStack was recommended to me as the best, simplest, go-to solution. I found it to be very user friendly and satisfied my requirements, so I was happy to stick with it and did not go elsewhere looking for anything else. This experience has been more …
BrowserStack provides User-friendly UI which helps me to easily use the tool and also configuration via code is easy, we have to just add the config JSON and update the devices there on which we want to automate. Realtime view of the app is a plus point, reporting is also there.
I haven't used any tool so I cannot rate any other tool. BrowserStack was the first tool we selected for our proof of concept and we liked it. We found some limitations and we reported those to BrowserStack and now they have added it in their roadmap to fix it. So overall, we …
I found Browserstack's website very informative and their documentation much more detailed than the other products I tried to explore. Also one more aspect where Browserstack stood out for me for other similar vendors is that they provide a 100 minute free trial for any newly …
SauceLabs was not intuitive. The launch response time was too high. It didn't offer flexibility in debugging, and the other testing features were not easily available.
We did a benchmark to compare multiple criterias: Security, reliability, Sound, Variety of devices, availability of devices, how long before new released devices are made available, easy to use, extra features, customer support, company reference, integration with our tools. …
The ease of BrowserStack usage is very good compared to other tools like LambdaTest. For each application or use case BrowserStack has solutions. What I think is when It comes to integrations with test automation frameworks BrowserStack can be improved and it needs to improve. …
UI of the BrowserStack is little bit better that other market competitors, and also it is little bit faster that other tools which are available in the market. BrowserStack also provides lots of real devices almost every device which are in the markets, other tools are not …
accessiBE is an accessibility only tool that cannot replicate browsers or devices. LambdaTest is comparable, however, after assessing the feature set, ultimately we decided BrowserStack was a better fit for our business. LambdaTest does have features that will meet most …
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
Since Selenium is restricted to only Web based applications it isn't suitable for our project which has Mainframe and desktop based applications in majority. Selenium is open source and free so it can be preferred for some projects
We need to look at open source tools if the team has time to learn like Selenium.
Selenium can integrate with just about anything to give you a robust framework such as Maven for source code compilation, Test NG to drive tests, Jenkins or Hudson to integrate into a Continuous …
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. …
The only real competitor is Selenium but the simple ease and advanced features of UFT won out during the selection process. Also the ability to test against non-web based applications can come in handy.
Most of the test tools are similar in nature to what they do. Every tool has its own quirks, making them necessary to understand how and what they do, before we get to start using them; which also happens to be the key to good automation testing. Considering the HP toolset, …
We got on board with HP UFT as we were sold on the BPT model used by HP. IT was an excellent way to create reusable scripts. That was the biggest advantage of going with HP UFT. Also have 1 tool for GUI and API testing. Previously, we had used service test from HP. But really …
HP UFT is an excellent tool for test automation; very flexible and powerful. It is much more intuitive than and easier to use than Selenium, however, the only downside when compared side by side with freelance tools like Selenium is the pricing. Selenium can be acquired for …
Since this tool is licensed most of the work is performed by the tool and one needs to just record or create basic script and it should be running in no time
Multiple real devices available for testing across different OS, platform and browsers for both website and mobile application testing. Automate help to integrate existing project and testing suite to run across different devices. This reduce testing timeline and allow us to quickly release new features to users. Also provide automated accessibility report.
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.
UI testing on different Devices like iOS, Android, MacOS, and Windows OS.
Automation testing with the help of Cypress gives automation access to different OS and devices.
Comparison with two devices how UI will look a like.
Bug Capture tool: Using this tool, a user can capture a bug while live recording it, and the tool captures action as well. This helps developers identify and fix the bug more easily.
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.
I wish it didn't time out so quickly. I often move back and forth between my native Mac OS system and browsers to BrowserStack for Windows browsers and it often times out so I have to start over.
I am not sure why, but when I've been testing in BrowserStack for a long period of time - maybe over a couple of hours, it sometimes gets buggy and unresponsive or slow to respond. It makes it hard to tell if I'm experiencing an issue with the site I'm testing or if it's an issue with BrowserStack.
If I'm wishing for the moon and stars, I'd ask for the ability to use BrowserStack to also test with JAWS screen reader. But I'm happy having NVDA.
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.
It's simply a must-have tool. As a designer, I have to ensure my work is at least functional in older browsers. I also have to ensure that, when I design for mobile devices, any differences between platforms aren't problematic. BrowserStack allows me to test my work in a fraction of the time, with a whole lot more accuracy.
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.
I rated BrowserStack's availability a 10 because it is consistently reliable, with minimal to no downtime or unplanned outages. The platform is accessible whenever needed, ensuring uninterrupted testing. Its robust infrastructure and proactive monitoring ensure a seamless experience, allowing us to meet deadlines without delays caused by availability issues and all
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.
I rated the implementation satisfaction an 8 because while it went smoothly overall, there were some challenges during the initial learning phase and integration with existing tools. Key insights include the importance of providing sufficient training upfront and ensuring seamless integration with other systems to minimize disruptions and improve adoption speed.
N/A - BrowserStack was the first software I've tried to address these requirements. Previously we've been limited to testing on a handful of devices and browser combinations that our team has physical access to. We're also evaluating Litmus as a complementary service to BrowserStack for analysing our email templates and deliverability.
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.
I may not be the best person to answer this as I am only using it for 1 department and at 1 site but will still try my best As far as Scalability for Devices for Mobile Automation is concerned, it gets a Solid 10, as the users can run cases on upto 10 device parallel and also have the best choices of devices to choose