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.
4 out of 5.0, Reviewed Aug 10, 2016
The setup was easier than some other automated testing suites but we still have difficulty with dynamically generate content such as pop windows. The test execution was also very slow and unreliable. We ended up having to purchase additional support hours which were used by Telerik to create a code-based framework for us which works much more efficiently and reliably.
Use the code based approach. Construct a hierarchical framework of composable test, where high-level test builds upon the lower-level test.
The UI is clean and easier to use than competitors such as SmartBear's TestComplete. The documentation and support are also high quality.
When you actually try to generate test by clicking through you GUI it doesn't work as effortlessly as shown in the demo which is why we had to resort to using a code-based approach.
Discuss the pitfalls of dealing with dynamically generated content like popup windows. There are several tricks required to get it to work which was time-consuming.
We would have started using the code based approach.
Radio buttons below aren't working. Answers to questions below in order from top to bottom are as following: 4 4 3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Telerik is a great company. The support is outstanding, the best I've seen.
4 out of 5.0, Reviewed Aug 3, 2016
Telerik isn't a good fit for an internal legacy application in my organization built with PowerBuilderand 4GL. Telerik has been good for web-based newer applications.
Start out the implementation of an automation tool with those that have an automation background or a developer. The implementation was easy enough for a non-technical QA, but we had to do a lot of re-work on the framework side as the experience was gained. That's not the tool's fault, but something to make note of going into a new automation project from ground up.
Easy to implement for web based applications.
Does not work for our internal application where a majority of our development is occurring on. We have to have 2 different automation tools because of this.
Nothing. Everything was fine - good sales process, good communication and follow up/follow through.
Start out the implementation of an automation tool with those that have an automation background or developer. The implementation was easy enough for a non-technical QA, but we had to do a lot of re-work on the framework side as the experience was gained. That's not the tool's fault, but something to make note of going into a new automation project from ground up.
OK, when used. Sometimes turn around with specific help was not timely. My team would seek a resolution on their own while waiting to hear back from support.
4 out of 5.0, Reviewed Aug 3, 2016
The interface is easy to use and learn quickly. The recording tool does not always perform as expected.
Look into many tools and find the one that integrates with your technologies best and provides the greatest return.
The record function makes it easy for those that are not as technical to pick it up and start creating automated scripts.
Inserting code into steps and then running the entire script seems to need some work. The product occasionally will crash as well when simply opening a project.
Make sure that management is hearing what the testers are saying rather than going with what they think is best.
Quick support when needed. Most issues I have been able to solve myself.
4 out of 5.0, Reviewed Aug 2, 2016
While implementation was easy and developing straight forward "record and play" automation testing could be started right away, more complex automation testing was challenging mainly because training was not brought in on-site and local training was not availale.
While it is easy to use the product and develop straight forward test automation, the product is very powerful and I woud recommend getting some in-house training in order to get the full benefits out the features this product provides.
The product is very flexible when using it against various web applications. Also the recent addition of the API testing feature makes the product more competitive in the market.
Test Studio is not availble in Linux.
We wish Test Studio offered an on-site training with the purchase of the product. The 4-hour web training purchased with the product was not enough for our implementation.
If the Test Studio implementation were to start all over again, an on-site training package would have been considered to be included in the purchase deal instead of a generic training webinar.
Service and Support is excellent and responsive. Whenever needed Support is willing to participate in a live demonstration of our issues via a web conference and at times the issues were resolved during these conferences.
5 out of 5.0, Reviewed Jul 28, 2016
Ability to use product is very simple and the instructions were easy to follow. The support structure is awesome. Responses to support requests usually come less than 18 hours after submission. Feature requests are always looked at and sometimes even integrated.
Make sure that this product will work for you. If it does not fit your exact specs, look into the other products offered by the same company.
The ability to use it. Very simple and easy.
Not enough customization around integration with other platform tools.
Change license structure to an on-demand license user instead of a single user license.
Make sure the infrastructure was in place first.
This is just a text box, it is not asking for anything specific in here.
5 out of 5.0, Reviewed Jul 22, 2016
We use a lot of the telerik tools in our every day development, so the compliment of test studio and it's tight integration with their own control sets are awesome!
This is 'the' tool for briding the gap between developers and testers, for having a tool to perform performance and load testing without having to have a separate team do it for you!
The collaboration between dev and sit, and the support we get from the vendor is awesome.
nothing they have been great.
Get our senior leadership to take technologies recommendations seriously, sooner rather than later.
Telerik is ALWAYS there when I need them