I understand that this is a QARun forum, but I wonder if anyone has experience with WinRunner as well. The QA team is evaluating GUI test automation tools, and WinRunner and QARun appear to be the final candidates. We want to implement our tests in the "data-driven" method, and we need to version-control our scripts.
After playing with the WinRunner eval., I find that WinRunner's scripts and test data are loosely arranged; on the other hand, the QARun sales claims that QARun's test scripts and data are stored in a database. Moreover the test scripts can be automatically version-controlled.
I wish to know what you think about the database structure, and how easy it is to store/retrieve test scripts/data from the database.
Depends what you mean by loosely controlled.
But again depends what you want. Both QARun and WinRunner are good tools and to be honest there is not that much difference but here is my 2pence worth.
I'm from the UK so my opnions are biased towards that market.
WinRunner good points:
1) Firstly WinRunner has more than 50% of the UK market so you will find more people who have experience of the tool can help with problems.
2) The site has a customer support section that you can search for all types of problems the answers usually contain code snippets too.
3) WinRunner has a far more complete code samples help file so you can look at how they have datadriven an application and just copy some of the examples.
4) I found there GUI Map (for maintaining the UI object references) alot easier than compuwares alias map or object map.
5) If you get more technical Winrunner provides you a fully declared win32api utility function for calling win32 dll functions. Very handy I found for some memory checking stuff I had to do!
1) If you need consultants to help you then Compuware have consultants not only for their toolset but for almost every area in the IT world.
2) They offer the most complete toolset (outside maybe Rational) for testing on mainframe, web, client/server, databases, etc.
3) Out the box the language is slightly easier to learn than WinRunner (I found) winRunner is more C like while QARun is more like VB and nearer to Rational Robot as far as automation is concerned.
4) Try also TestPartner there new tool which is geared towards the web side but it has VBA for a scripting language which is one of the most powerful scripting languages (except maybe Visual Test and Silk).
You seem to like QARun so if it does what you require go with them.
They both are as competent as each other (generally) for database testing they are the same, I found winrunner better for webtesting JAva apps across various versions including 1.1.8 - 1.3. Again my opnion.
They are both similar for datadriven testing although Mercury has a very slight edge with including a basic data table for creating data. (By the way the best data driven test tool I have seen is Rational Robot's Datapool) but Compuwares FileAid is fantastic but at an extra cost.
They both have a facility for finding out the details of objects on a screen either as a gui spy or identify tool.
They both have basic version control but WinRunner is tied mainly in Test Director. If you are getting both QARRun and QADirector or TEstDirector and WinRunner then I think Mercury has the edge as a bug/change tracking system will be included.
Cost wise I find Mercury to be more expensive than Compuware but is slight cost variations a major factor?
When you say database I presume you mean where scripts are stored. etc? PLease note they are both adequate at organising scripts etc and this is the least of your worries please ensure the tool of choice can recognise the objects in you application. This is the most important thing in automation because if it does not believe me you will curse the tool for a long while.
"The best goodbyes are short. Adieu." Kasper Gutman, The Maltese Falcon
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Rayr_UK: They both have basic version control but WinRunner is tied mainly in Test Director. If you are getting both QARRun and QADirector or TEstDirector and WinRunner then I think Mercury has the edge as a bug/change tracking system will be included. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
just a short comment to the above paragraph; If you're getting both QADirector and QARun I would imagine you'd go for the whole QACenter package. That would be more cost effective I think. In the QACenter package you also get TrackRecord, which is a bug/change tracking system, as well as Reconsile, which is for requirements management.
We're evaluating test tools as well these days, and our finalists were Compuware and Mercury. We've decided to do a full Proof of Concept on Compuware's solution now. If it works out to our satisfaction we'll go for that solution.