| || |
differences between Automatisation tools
I was asked to gather information on TestComplete, Silk test, HP QTP(UI and web testing). I need to know what kind of applications ones are better destined for ( e.g. errors can occure if i tested complex c# gui on TestComplete, so i better to use QTP). But it seems quite complicated task, because all this tools works fine so far.
Could you , plz help me ?
TestComplete is probably the most different out of the 3. It has a dual licensing model and uses a different scripting engine which let's you use different languages.
QTP has been around the longest. There's a thriving 3rd party tools and support community around it.
Silk I don't know too much about. I've seen the tool, but I haven't used it to any professional capacity to comment on it.
All three has pretty good .Net support, so c# applications won't pose too much of a trouble until you start using custom drawn or 3rd party controls. QTP has a larger market place of 3rd party plugins for this sort of stuff. Test Complete has better documentation when you want to write your own object proxy (Generally this is only used by SDETs or Architects, few developers like to get their hands dirty with the amount of serialization and synchronization code necessary to pull one off. I tend to use this only as a last resort). I don't know where Silk stands on this.
Unless you don't have the option to ask, I'd recommend expanding your search past those tools. A lot depends on the type of end users you'll have using the tools as well as the type of application you have, how often it changes, how many operating systems or environments you want to be able to test across, and more.
Do you know the answers to any of those questions? That can help you better compare them.
froglogic | Automated GUI Testing & Code Coverage