We are trying to decide between two testing tools and we have a concern with Technical Support accessibility and response time, specifically from Mercury versus Segue. Another significant concern is maintaining scripts if a minor change has been made to the GUI or to the functionality of the application. Any words of wisdom from you, experienced testers out there?
Re: Technical Support
I am divided between the two tools on the questions you ask. As for my experience, the support for Mercury is much better than that of Segue. They appear to be more responsive and while their initial answers are not always that detailed I never have trouble getting follow up. This is generally not the case with Segue - although I will say that the support for SilkPerformer has been much better than for that of SilkTest.
Having said that, there are many more sites that give SilkTest programming examples than there are those that give WinRunner programming examples. This is not to say that WinRunner's language is not as good necessarily; I am just saying that I have been able to supplement Segue's lack of really good support for SilkTest by leveraging the content on the Web. I doubt I could do this with Mercury's WinRunner if their support was not as good.
As far as the "minor change to GUI" issue that you bring up, I find that, in this case, I rely on SilkTest more. The reason for this is that I can build object oriented infrastructures with its language plus you have good language constructs, like GenerateDecl(), which allows you to do a lot of GUI construction on the fly. That is not to say you cannot do these things in WinRunner but it is much harder to do and, again in my experience, is not always as robust.