TrustRadius: an HG Insights company

OpenText UFT Digital Lab vs. SoapUI Open Source, supported by SmartBear

Save this comparison

Save this comparison

Add Product

Recommended Comparisons

    Overview
    ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price

    OpenText UFT Digital Lab

    Score9 out of 10
    N/AFormerly from Micro Focus, a centralized lab of real mobile devices and emulators. With remote access, developers and testers can develop, debug, test, monitor, and optimize mobile apps from anywhere.N/A

    SoapUI Open Source

    Score8.7 out of 10
    N/ASoapUI is an open source API testing tool supported by SmartBear's community, supporting functional and performance testing of APIs.N/A
    Pricing
    OpenText UFT Digital LabSoapUI Open Source
    Editions & Modules
    No answers on this topic
    No answers on this topic
    Offerings
    Pricing Offerings
    OpenText UFT Digital LabSoapUI Open Source
    Free Trial
    NoNo
    Free/Freemium Version
    NoNo
    Premium Consulting/Integration Services
    NoNo
    Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
    Additional Details——
    More Pricing Information
    Community Pulse
    OpenText UFT Digital LabSoapUI Open Source
    Considered Both Products
    OpenText
    No answer on this topic
    SmartBear
    No answer on this topic
    Key User Insights
    Would buy again
    No answers on this topic
    100%
    Would buy again
    5 Answers
    Delivers good value for the price
    No answers on this topic
    No answers on this topic
    Happy with the feature set
    No answers on this topic
    100%
    Happy with the feature set
    5 Answers
    Lived up to sales and marketing promises
    No answers on this topic
    No answers on this topic
    Implementation went as expected
    No answers on this topic
    No answers on this topic
    Best Alternatives
    OpenText UFT Digital LabSoapUI Open Source
    Small Businesses
    No answers on this topic
    TestComplete
    Score8 out of 10
    Medium-sized Companies
    No answers on this topic
    OpenText UFT One
    Score7.6 out of 10
    Enterprises
    Tricentis NeoLoad
    Score9.3 out of 10
    ReadyAPI
    Score7 out of 10
    All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
    User Ratings
    OpenText UFT Digital LabSoapUI Open Source
    Likelihood to Recommend
    9.0
    (2 ratings)
    8.0
    (6 ratings)
    Likelihood to Renew
    9.0
    (1 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    User Testimonials
    OpenText UFT Digital LabSoapUI Open Source
    Likelihood to Recommend
    OpenText
    UFT mobile works really well if/when you need physical devices under your management. Managing physical devices in any setup is an interesting undertaking due to the various considerations per device. There are really nice best practices, for example using managed USB switches like the one from Cambrionix, that can help make for a really good experience. For us, we only have 1 application at this time that has frequent updates/releases. We are able to test out these with confidence using our suite of real/on-campus devices managed and made available by the UFT Mobile product.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    SmartBear
    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
    Read full review
    Pros
    OpenText
    • Remote access to real devices within your organization network as compared to public devices library offering, where their is a risk of exposing pre-production builds outside the organization.
    • "Factory built like" integration with HP ALM, HP Sprinter, HP UFT and HP Network Virtualization.
    • Ability to mimic real world conditions in a controlled environment in the devices of your choice.
    • Removed the guess work out of using emulators
    • Able to extend automation to mobile testing using HP UFT.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    SmartBear
    • Ease of implementation
    • Ease of use
    • User friendly interface
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Cons
    OpenText
    • Most of our problems are with the lengthy onboarding process with iOS devices.
    • Occasionally Android devices will disconnect themselves.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    SmartBear
    • 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
    Read full review
    Likelihood to Renew
    OpenText
    The tool continues to meet our expectations and has shown that they are continually evolving the product with new features that benefit us. The most recent new feature was the auto-signing/packaging of iOS apps from the server to allow native interaction of features like biometrics. Prior this was a lengthy exercise.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    SmartBear
    No answers on this topic
    Alternatives Considered
    OpenText
    HP Mobile Center stacks well against solutions like Mobile Labs Device Connect, Perfecto Mobile and Device Anywhere. Its native integration with HP ALM and HP UFT makes it a clear choice for team already using those solutions. HP Mobile Center also provides extension to Amazon Device Library.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    SmartBear
    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
    Read full review
    Return on Investment
    OpenText
    • Efficient use of the devices. Reduced the idle time.
    • Better control over access and user management. Testing within our controlled environments.
    • Better control of device matrix.
    • Faster testing cycles. Early design bugs to development teams. Real devices means, less guess work.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    SmartBear
    • 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
    Read full review
    ScreenShots