MICRO FOCUS LOADRUNNER WINDOWS

For continuous use and application of the solution to different use cases, the fee is average.' If someone makes use of the solution once a day for a half hour then the fee will be more expensive. The recent Covid pandemic situation also hit customer budgets significantly, so Micro Focus offered some discounted prices, which is definitely competitive.' 'The pricing fee is good. That is probably one of the biggest things that I hear from most people, even at conferences, 'Yeah, I would love to use UFT One, but we don't have a budget for it.'' 'Compared to other tools in the market, UFT One is very competitive. Because instead of paying for the new product, you are just paying for the support and maintenance of it. Then, every year after, it is around half or less. I don't see that being an issue.' 'The way the pricing model works is that you pay a whole boatload year one. So if it's a large corporation, it can easily afford $15,000 to $25,000. I don't know how many QA analysts you would have in any given company.

MICRO FOCUS LOADRUNNER WINDOWS

Compared to the old school LoadRunner Windows application, the reporting and analysis are mediocre in LoadRunner Cloud.' And when it comes to database testing, there are some things that we can't do through CI/CD.' 'Reporting and analysis need improvement. There are some limitations to some protocols, such as desktop. The challenges are around how you can containerize applications.

The solution isn't lacking anything at this point.' 'There are three modules in the system that are different products packaged into one, and they can sometimes be difficult to figure out, so they should be better integrated with each other.' 'I would like for there to be better integration with other tools so that when you do load testing you can also do a security check.' 'We are trying to put it into a complete CI/CD pipeline, but there are still some challenges when you try to run it through different protocols. 'Improvements to the reporting would be good.' 'I don't know of any features that should be added. Using TruClient, we can still create scripts that cover everything that we need to cover.' So many other tools do not recognize this specific proprietary protocol. An application with testing can only be scripted using TruClient, so it's part web-based, but it also has its own protocol combined with HTTP and HTML. If something is not supported, you have to use other tools or find other ways of assimilating loads.' 'The TruClient feature is the most valuable for us. I' 'The fact that the solution supports multiple protocols such as open source, VuGen, TruWeb, TruClient, and SAP is very important because these protocols help us to concentrate on what is really needed to produce performance tests. It's easy to use because it's script based, record, and playback. It sees what peaks of volumes that the process can handle. Java's background process does a lot of tracing. It's all driven by the script, so it's a script-based tool where the background tracing starts. In either case, it works well and you can use it either way.' 'The most valuable feature is that we do not have to accommodate the load-testing infrastructure in our own data center.' 'The record and playback feature is the most valuable feature. When I use AWS, then I tend to use Lambda functions. When I use it in on Azure, then Red Hat is the most likely solution I use. 'The most valuable feature is that you can create an infrastructure on-demand and do performance testing with it.' 'The usability and ability to integrate with other solutions is quite good.

Micro focus loadrunner