5 out of 5.0, Reviewed Oct 7, 2016
Our overall experience was good but users should be prepared to make a substantial investment in ramping up on the tool. Ultimately, it may be more cost effective to pay additional for consulting services to get you up and running.
Paying for the consultants to build a custom framework was money well spent. The tool is complex and it's not as easy as the documentation makes it out to be. Especially, if you have dynamic controls such as popups and things of that nature. There are a lot of little tricks required to make it work effectively. The ramp up time was about 3 months. We weren't expecting it to take so long to get up to speed on using the tool.
The UX is simple and clean, the documentation is extensive, and the Telerik (Progress) support is second to none.
The search features of the website are difficult to use. I often had to fix what I was looking for through Google. The sample SDKs are difficult to locate which may be part of the last issue (search capability).
Offer more information on the alternate code based approach. We weren't aware that was really an option.
If we could start over we would not have gone down the path of recording tests by pointing and clicking (recording). We would have started out with building a customized code-based framework to support our desktop application because the resulting tests were much more reliable (fewer failures due to timing) and faster (execution time).
4 out of 5.0, Reviewed Oct 7, 2016
Easy to install and implement.
Evaluate with simple and complex applications to ensure the tool will meet your needs and to evaluate what integrations are available.
Cost effective solution.
Easy to implement.
Nothing at this point.