Mercury Quick Test vs. SilkTest
I have been using silk to test my web application. And frankly I'm get sick of using it. Has anyone use Both Silk and OuickTest. And if so what is the better tool to test the web. Or if you have used one or the other. What do you think are the plus and minus of the tool.
Re: Mercury Quick Test vs. SilkTest
Segue's SilkTest is usually compared to Mercury's WinRunner. Papers exist to compare and contrast the two tools. I have just finished a comparison, too. Assuming that they both work with your test application, the rest is ease of use. SilkTest is more of a programming language that appeals to programmer-types (strongly-typed variables, UDTs, oo-based, etc.). WinRunner is looser, and, to my mind, quicker to use and easier to learn. You still need to know programming to be successful, however.
Mercury's QuickTest is even easier, but without the ability of WinRunner to program. You can easily navigate an app, check for broken links, and check functionality.