Micro Focus Business Process Testing (discontinued) vs. SoapUI Open Source, supported by SmartBear

You may want to consider this solution if you are already using HP ALM and HP UFT. It's a nice add on and encourages the team to think more on building small component based tests and promote lot of reuse. Also, if your team want business analysts or any non technical people build tests based on the flows, its probably the best solution available now. On the down side, the execution times if you have too many components are not great and on top of that you have to pay extra for the licensing. You can also build such frameworks using more open source solutions like bdd solutions.

Incentivized

Good for simple requests, simple scripts, assertions, and small workflows. Also not bad with the Open Source version if savvy with code as you can do a lot with custom functionality.Free version has limited compatibility with scripts/projects created from the Pro version, but functionality-wise can probably be made up with coding. As such, the free version may not be too suitable for complex scripts or for those who are not familiar with coding as functionality/usability may be limited.

Incentivized

• Biggest advantage is - you can use the same components created for manual as well as automated testing
• It has a nice little feature called extended capabilities where you can easily automate tests SAP and oracle type architectures.
• Easy access library lets you create highly reusable and shareable components and the integrations is not that difficult

Incentivized

• Ease of implementation
• Ease of use
• User friendly interface

Incentivized

• If you are using components for automation testing, the time it takes to load a new component is too high and it sucks off the benefit of component based testing.
• You want to have many components in a test and so a BA can also create automated tests easily but too many components takes too long to executed .
• It comes with a cost. You can simply build a modular framework even without this framework and probably more efficiently.

Incentivized

• I actually like SoapUI as it is, I have not found things to improve, except for the speed of response is very complex services.

Incentivized

The idea for building a component based modular test framework is great and it would be great add-on to HP tools if the add-on efficiency is made high and the cost is low.

Incentivized

Compared to SoapUI, we have been using "light" tools like RestClient extension in Firefox, or Postman. Compared to Postman, SoapUI is more simple for WSDL / SOAP webservices, as SoapUI generate all envelop, but Postman does not. For Rest API, I think that Postman is a little above SoapUI, but not too far away.

Incentivized

• As the tool itself promotes re usability, we were able to cut down development and maintenance costs by good %.
• More than cost savings, out no technical folks started building automated tests based on user flows very easily.

Incentivized

• Testing resolves most of the issues in the development phases.
• User friendliness of the app makes it good.
• Overall client happiness depends on the clean project, which is possible by testing.

Incentivized