So I have been tasked with picking a functional automation tool at my work.
One tool I am looking at is Silktest (using Silk Performer currently and works great for Performance Testing) but now have run into the problem of having to choose between classic and workbench.
The goal is to develop regression suites with a framework to eliminate as much maintanence and repetitive work. Mainly will be web based but in the future some client side apps might need to be automated as well.
I'd like to get some info on what the community thinks is better.
I have been trying both out and so far but I am very limited in time since this came up last minute since the budget will disappear soon if we don't pick a tool.
I have about 5 years experience with functional automation using Selenium, QTP and Eggplant.
I am not a fan of record and playback since overtime you might have to remake the complete regression suite for large releases and lets face it record and playback never really works for more complicated websites. A tool that is powerful and can be customized would be preferred.
Here is something that I read on the internet that worries me "Also favoring WorkBench is that MicroFocus promises development of WorkBench but only support for Classic. That means Classic support will eventually end also. Why start a new endeavor with a doomed tool when the same vendor offers an alternative they're banking on for their future?"
Thanks for all the feedback. I wish I had time to evaluate this tool more completely but I am hoping I can determine which tool is better.
Senior IS QA Developer
LR, QTP, QC Admin, Sitescope, SilkPerformer
I don't know have either one. I have Test Partner which is dying off and move up to Silk Test. I have been trying Silk Test on and off over the last 2 years.
MicroFocus bought Silk Test and Test Partner from two different companies. Obviously no company wants to sell two of the same product.
As far as I understand it Silk Test Classic is how Silk Test use to be. It uses some strange language that only Silk Test classic used (I think). (Test Partner used a Visual Basic for Application).
Micro Focus decided to in a way to join both of these products together. Silk Test 13.5 is the newest release. They use Visual Basic .NET. Which is pretty easy to pick up, but also powerful then either of the other two languages they used before.
When you buy Silk Test 13.5 you get the Workbench and the older Silk Test classic (if you want to install it). I don't see any reason to do that.
With this being .NET it now uses all the Objects and Classes and all that stuff. Being more complicated also means being more powerful, but I would also say maybe a little bit more confusing to some.
I have been amazed at how fast Silk Test is with our Web applications compared to Test Partner. I would say almost twice as fast.
I have always written the scripts because I feel like I have more control over what is done and can do my own stuff. I'm just rambling now. What I'm trying to say is. When I'm writing a script I record 4 -5 steps, then I'll tweak it how I want, then do the same thing again. You are always going to have to go back and change things as your program changes.
Now with that all said, even though this is Silk Test 13.5 Its really only version 2 or 3. They pretty much started over with Silk Test around Silk Test 11. (maybe 10). It seems like to me they have spent most of their time getting the Visual Test side working. And there is a lot you can do there. But like I said I just feel like I can do more writing the script. But the scripting side seems kind of lacking. Even just the Program itself seems behind what Test Partner can do. But they are coming along. I hope to be a part of some Customer evaluation program. You get access to the Beta, but more you give them feedback of what you would like to see in the program.