BrowserStack vs. OpenText UFT One

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
BrowserStack
Score 8.6 out of 10
N/A
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
BrowserStackOpenText 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
Test Observability - Unlimited Free
$0
Accessibility Testing - Free
$0
Test Observability - Observability Pro
$0.01
per month per test execution
Percy - Desktop
$0.02
per month per screenshot
App Percy - Visual Core
$0.02
per month per screenshot
Percy - Desktop & Mobile
$0.02
per month per screenshot
App Percy - Visual Cloud
$0.03
per month per screenshot
Live - Desktop
$29
per month per user
Live - Desktop & Mobile
$39
per month per user
App Live - Individual
$39
per month per user
Automate - Desktop
$129
per month 1 parallel test
Live - Team
$150
per month 5 users
App Live - Team
$150
per month 5 users
Automate - Desktop & Mobile
$199
per month 1 parallel test
App Automate - Device Cloud
$199
per month 1 parallel test
App Live - Team Pro
$199
per month 5 users
Accessibility Testing - Team
$199
per month 5 users
App Automate - Device Cloud Pro
$249
per month 1 parallel test
Automate - Enterprise
Contact sales team
Percy - Enterprise
Contact Sales
App Automate - Enterprise
Contact Sales
App Live - Enterprise
Contact sales team
Live - Enterprise
Contact sales team
App Automate - Device Cloud Pro + Visual Cloud
Contact Sales
App Percy - Enterprise
Contact Sales
Test Observability - Enterprise
Contact Sales
Accessibility Testing - Enterprise
Contact Sales
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
BrowserStackOpenText UFT One
Free Trial
YesNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
BrowserStackOpenText UFT One
Considered Both Products
BrowserStack
Chose BrowserStack
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 …
Chose BrowserStack
It's easy to use, Cost effective and Reliable.
Chose BrowserStack
Both tools are good and we are suing both for better testing.
Chose BrowserStack
Screen reader capability in the mobile and Tablet devices
Chose BrowserStack
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 …
Chose BrowserStack
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.
Chose BrowserStack
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 …
Chose BrowserStack
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 …
Chose BrowserStack
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.
Chose BrowserStack
Only other thing we have used is local simulators.
Chose BrowserStack
More devices , more features and easy to use
Chose BrowserStack
Our department manager ultimately decided to go with BrowserStack as they offered more real-world devices in their cloud than LambdaTest.
Chose BrowserStack
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. …
Chose BrowserStack
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. …
Chose BrowserStack
TestRail, very configurable in fields and how test case mgmt can be configured.
Chose BrowserStack
BrowserStack by far is still the best tool we have for mobile and accessibility testing.
Chose BrowserStack
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 …
Chose BrowserStack
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 …
OpenText UFT One
Chose OpenText UFT One
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
Chose OpenText UFT One
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
Chose OpenText UFT One

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 …

Chose OpenText UFT One
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. …
Chose OpenText UFT One
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.
Chose OpenText UFT One
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, …
Chose OpenText UFT One
  • Alignment/Integration with other products like ALM, Sprinter, Mobile Center
  • Knowledge availability
  • Dedicated vendor support
Chose OpenText UFT One
[My] company uses UFT across different projects and different departments for all types of testing and automation.
Chose OpenText UFT One
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 …
Chose OpenText UFT One
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 …
Chose OpenText UFT One
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
Best Alternatives
BrowserStackOpenText UFT One
Small Businesses
TestComplete
TestComplete
Score 8.0 out of 10
BrowserStack
BrowserStack
Score 8.6 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
ReadyAPI
ReadyAPI
Score 7.0 out of 10
ReadyAPI
ReadyAPI
Score 7.0 out of 10
Enterprises
ignio AIOps
ignio AIOps
Score 8.1 out of 10
ReadyAPI
ReadyAPI
Score 7.0 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
BrowserStackOpenText UFT One
Likelihood to Recommend
9.0
(0 ratings)
9.0
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
9.4
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Usability
5.5
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Availability
9.8
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Performance
2.3
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
6.1
(0 ratings)
8.0
(0 ratings)
In-Person Training
7.3
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Online Training
4.1
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Implementation Rating
8.1
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Configurability
7.5
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Ease of integration
9.1
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Product Scalability
9.8
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Vendor post-sale
9.1
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Vendor pre-sale
9.1
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
BrowserStackOpenText UFT One
Likelihood to Recommend
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.
Read full review
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.
Read full review
Pros
  • 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.
Read full review
  • 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.
Read full review
Cons
  • 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.
Read full review
  • 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.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
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.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Usability
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.
Read full review
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
Read full review
Reliability and Availability
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
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Performance
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.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Support Rating
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.
Read full review
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.
Read full review
In-Person Training
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.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Online 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.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Implementation Rating
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.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Alternatives Considered
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.
Read full review
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.
Read full review
Scalability
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
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Return on Investment
  • It reduced the cost of buying multiple devices as we have multiple devices access in it
  • Easily accessible from anywhere due to it cloud availability
  • Introducing this to our client also helped us in building trust as well as winning their confidence during deliverables
Read full review
  • 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
Read full review
ScreenShots

BrowserStack Screenshots

Screenshot of Screenshot of Screenshot of Screenshot of Screenshot of Screenshot of