UFT One is great for recording and automating test cases.
Functional Testing
OpenTextReviews from AWS customer
0 AWS reviews
-
5 star0
-
4 star0
-
3 star0
-
2 star0
-
1 star0
External reviews
14 reviews
from
External reviews are not included in the AWS star rating for the product.
Great for recording and automating test cases
What is our primary use case?
What is most valuable?
The most valuable feature is that it is fast during test execution, unlike LoadRunner.
What needs improvement?
One area for improvement is its occasional slowness.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been working with OpenText UFT One for a long time.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
UFT One was generally stable and didn't have significant downtime or performance issues. The only notable drawback was its slower performance during certain tasks.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
UFT One itself appeared to be fairly scalable, as it generally runs one test at a time. However, it can be integrated into LoadRunner for combined testing, although I haven't delved deeply into that aspect.
How was the initial setup?
The installation and setup of UFT One were relatively easy. I had to install it on my computer, and the only requirement was access to a license server. Overall, it wasn't a complex installation process. The deployment took about an hour.
What other advice do I have?
I would recommend UFT One to those considering its use. It is straightforward to set up, especially with the AI capabilities, although it can be slow at times. Despite the occasional slowness, it is much easier to use now compared to earlier versions and can save a significant amount of time compared to manual functional testing. Overall, I would rate the solution as a nine out of ten.
A highly stable and flexible tool that provides quick and accurate results
What is most valuable?
It is a flexible tool. Its object-capturing criteria and capabilities are very strong. The product’s execution is faster than other products, and we can get the results quickly. It interacts directly with the browser's DOM and any mobile application's activity. Inspecting objects is a very powerful feature of the product. The results are precise and accurate. It has different uses in artificial intelligence. Compared to other products, UFT One is better, faster, and more accurate.
What needs improvement?
A person who buys the solution for the first time will not have a step-by-step approach to using it. I have worked with Cypress, Selenium RC, WebDriver, and other tools. I have been automating applications for the last ten years. I have never seen a solution that is difficult to learn. Learning was a challenge for me with UFT One.
The product doesn't provide free training for the basic features. It provides paid training. Understanding the tool's complete architecture took me one or two weeks. The product should provide free training for basic features like how to capture an object, create a new test case, connect the test cases, and create libraries. The product should explain each function and feature on the left side of the menu bar in a step-by-step way.
The product should provide a mechanism for online reporting accessible to every stakeholder. When I used to create test cases and execute them, I used to get the local reports. There should be a live online reporting mechanism. The live application must be available for every stakeholder, whether a manager, developer, or QA.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using the solution for around one year.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
The product is very stable. I rate the stability a nine out of ten.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
I rate the tool’s scalability a seven out of ten. Three people in my organization use the solution.
How are customer service and support?
I have used technical support. The support team was very supportive. The team would set up meetings with me, diagnose the issues, and sort them out. However, there were some delays in the meetings.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
I have worked with other tools like Ranorex and Katalon, but UFT One is comparatively faster.
How was the initial setup?
The initial setup was not easy. I purchased three licenses because we were planning to hire people. When I started working on the solution, at a certain point, I got stuck and regretted purchasing it. My client had paid for it. I had a good experience later. However, in the beginning, it was really frustrating.
What about the implementation team?
The deployment took around one hour. We needed two people to deploy the product in our organization.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
Compared to other products, the solution is very expensive. For the coverage and accuracy that it provides, the product is good compared to other products. However, it is a difficult solution. The time spent learning the solution also costs the organization. I rate the pricing a seven or eight out of ten.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
We also evaluated Tosca along with Micro Focus UFT One.
What other advice do I have?
I will recommend the solution for its accuracy, speed, scalability, and UI. Overall, I rate the product an eight out of ten.
Scalable solution with good customer service
What is our primary use case?
We use the solution for defect tracking and test automation features.
What needs improvement?
They should include AI-based testing features in the solution for assessment and identifying potential databases.
For how long have I used the solution?
We have been using the solution for more than ten years.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
It is a scalable solution. I rate its scalability as a ten.
How are customer service and support?
The solution's customer service is excellent. They always prioritize our tickets.
How was the initial setup?
The solution's initial setup process is easy. I rate it as a ten.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
We purchase the solution's yearly license. It costs 700k. There are no additional costs involved.
What other advice do I have?
The solution is easy to integrate and adapt for manual testing. It manages tests very well. It is an excellent tool in terms of customization. I rate it as a nine.
UFT One supports a large variety of Technologies and Automates both Functional and API testing
How long have you been using this solution?
I have over a decade of experience with Unified Functional Testing (UFT), amounting to more than 10,000 hours of hands-on use. I originally started with QuickTest Professional (QTP), the predecessor to UFT. Next, I moved to UFT 11.50 upon its release and have since worked with versions 12.52, 12.54, 14.03, 14.52, 14.53, 15.0, 15.0.1, 2022, and 2023.
What is your primary use case of this solution?
I use UFT One primarily for running automated regression tests after each release, focusing on Web applications in Chrome and Microsoft (Chromium) Edge. My work also involves testing standalone applications (e.g., Java, Visual Basic, .NET, and SAP), new script development, and script maintenance. UFT One 15.0.1 introduced a redesigned UI with two selectable themes: Default and Dark. Users can switch between them easily through the Options settings. For clarity, I have two pasted screenshots - UFT Default theme (Figure 1) and UFT Dark theme (Figure 2) displayed below.
Figure 1) UFT One Default theme
Figure 2) UFT One Dark theme
Please share how Micro Focus UFT One has improved your organization. If it did not, please explain why.
During my career UFT has improved the organizations I have worked for because after a release, hundreds of regression tests can be scheduled to run unattended overnight and get the test results in the morning. UFT also has a built-in reporter utility that clearly shows what specific tests were executed, the Pass/Fail status, and exactly where a test step failed along with the timestamp. This is especially important for providing proof of the test results in the future if requested.
Which features have you found most valuable, and why?
The best feature of UFT by far is its compatibility with a large variety of products, tools and technologies. It is currently a challenge to find a single tool on the market besides UFT that will successfully automate tests for so many projects and environments.
-
Wide Range Compatibility
UFT supports a wide range of technologies and platforms, including Chrome, Edge, Firefox, SAP, Oracle, Terminal Emulator, .NET, PuTTY, and more. -
Windows Application Automation
Capable of automating Microsoft Outlook, Word, SharePoint, and native Windows dialog boxes. -
Excel Integration
Enhanced Data Table functionality supports both .XLS and .XLSX file formats for importing, exporting, and data manipulation. - AI-Based Testing (This feature is so important that I am currently writing a separate article dedicated entirely to demonstrating UFT's AI-based capabilities). AI-based object recognition now supports desktop browsers in addition to mobile, improving test resilience and maintainability.
- API & Database Testing
Fully integrated API and database testing capabilities allow end-to-end functional test coverage within the same too.
New features in UFT One* (not all listed)
- Supports testing SAP GUI for Windows applications using AI.
- Updated Browser Support: The tool now supports the latest versions of major browsers, including Chrome, Chromium Edge, and Firefox.
- Use the GetTextFromImageByColor method to retrieve text of a specific color from an image file.
- Use the GetTextLocationFromImageByColor method to return the location of a text string of a specific color in an image file.
New features in UFT One** (not all listed)
- Microsoft 365 Supported
- Windows 10 22H2 update
- Windows 11 22H2 update
- You can now use regular expressions to describe text for AI-based object identification.
- Digital Lab (UFT Mobile): UFT Mobile has been rebranded to Digital Lab.
*Version 2022
**Version 2023
The InsightObject feature
Every UFT release includes the InsightObject feature, which allows the script to identify any object as an image at runtime using a configurable “similarity” property. Despite being image‑based, the GetVisibleText method can be used on an InsightObject to extract its text dynamically. I've devoted a section with Figures 3 through 10 to explain the InsightObject feature, including annotated screenshots and step-by-step descriptions using NASA imagery.
Figure 3) Web Page used to illustrate InsightObject functionality
Credit: NASA.gov
Image credit: NASA Ames/JPL-Caltech
We want UFT to capture the area of the image that contains the planets Mercury, Venus, Earth and Mars. This is done by using the InsightObject feature. The area of object is selected that we want to identify and add to the Object Repository.
Figure 4) InsightObject displaying the captured object within the Web Page
Credit: NASA.gov
Image credit: NASA Ames/JPL-Caltech
Figure 5) InsightObject displayed when added to the Object Repository. The object is “InsightObjectFourPlanets”
Credit: NASA.gov
Image credit: NASA Ames/JPL-Caltech
Figure 6) IDE code with InsightObject named ”InsightObjectFourPlanets”
Credit: NASA.gov
Image credit: NASA Ames/JPL-Caltech
Figure 7) Code with InsightObject using the Highlight method.
Credit: NASA.gov
Image credit: NASA Ames/JPL-Caltech
Figure 8) Cool feature: Move the mouse over the InsightObject and it clearly displays the image object.
Credit: NASA.gov
Image credit: NASA Ames/JPL-Caltech
Figure 9) Using the GetVisibleText method to get the text from “InsightObjectFourPlanets” and assign it to the variable strGetTextPlanets.
The UFT Print Log displaying Output
Figure 10) Print Log after execution displays the text below:
“strGetTextPlanets = Mercury Venus Earth Mars”
In what areas could the product or service be improved? What additional features should be included in the next release?
Sometimes UFT can take a while to open and sometimes will run slower than expected. The "Print Button" was removed (previously available in QTP), now requiring users to use "Ctrl + P" to print IDE code, with no "File >> Print" option. Adding a "Print Button" and improving printed IDE output formatting would be beneficial. The 30-day trial license is too short for learning all the features; extending it to 60 days would attract more customers.
Alternatives and Advice: Did you previously use a different solution and if so, why did you switch?
I originally started with QuickTest Professional (QTP) and have consistently used the latest UFT versions. The expanded capabilities and integration of features previously sold separately (i.e. Service Test for API) make UFT a comprehensive solution.
What do you advise others about setup cost, pricing and/or licensing?
1. Assess Your Testing Needs
Determine the size of your QA team and the scope of your automation (functional, regression, API).
Confirm whether API testing will be required, since it’s included in UFT’s licensing.
2. Hands-On Evaluation
Beyond vendor demos, have at least one developer or automation engineer install the trial version.
Encourage them to explore real-world scenarios during the demo period to validate functionality.
3. Staffing Considerations
Hire an Automation Engineer experienced with similar automation tools and proficient in VBScript.
Ensure they understand advanced scripting techniques (i.e., writing reusable functions, passing parameters by Value vs. by Reference).
4. Infrastructure Recommendations
Consider installing UFT on a Citrix Server for centralized patching, browser updates, and easier maintenance.
Citrix also supports multiple concurrent sessions and remote access, streamlining team collaboration.
Do you have any additional comments or advice regarding this solution?
Many customers are unaware that UFT includes both GUI and API testing in all versions. When discussing the price, it's important to note that it covers API testing as well. Previously, the API feature was known as Service Test when QTP existed and had to be purchased separately. UFT is essentially QTP and Service Test bundled into one product. For clarity, I have displayed a screenshot of a basic API test below in Fig. 11) that sends an HTTP Request.
Figure 11) API Test “API_DEMO_UFT_TEST” that sends an HTTP Request
Figure 12) API Test “API_DEMO_UFT_TEST” Results displayed
What are your impressions of the scalability of this solution?
It is quite straightforward to add users. The primary limitation is the number of licenses.
What are your impressions of the stability of this solution?
UFT One is generally stable. It can sometimes run out of memory when executing a long test set or when executing several hours continuously.
What is your ROI?
Determining return on investment (ROI) must be evaluated individually, depending on your organization’s specific use case. In my experience, significant returns come from:
- Automated Regression Testing: Reduces manual testing hours, especially for frequent or large-scale releases.
- Conditioned Data Generation: Saves considerable manual effort, allowing manual testers to concentrate on higher-value testing activities.
- API Testing Integration: Leveraging UFT’s built-in API testing enhances efficiency, reduces overall test execution time, and further contributes to ROI.
Was the initial setup straightforward or complex and in what ways?
Installing UFT is typically straightforward. If your organization uses concurrent licenses, you will need a system administrator to install and configure the License Server. The set-up will vary depending on your company’s infrastructure and environment-specific requirements.
Did you implement through a vendor team or an in-house one?
Implemented in-house.
Tell us about your experience with customer service and support.
This will vary by the Service Provider your company chooses.
showing 11 - 14