I have been evaluating Astra LoadTest and found that it was a pretty decent tool and easy to use. I found that you can do some decent regression testing with this tool as well as load testing. However, it's not super flexible and cost is a tad steep (but not unreasonable). I am thinking of trying the eTest Suite next. How does this product compare with Astra? Both in terms of features/usability and cost?
I use Empirix's EJB tool mostly (Bean-test), but I have heard my colleagues talk about e-test suite.
They tell me that eTest Suite may compare to Astra in price, but that eTest Suite compares to LoadRunner in functionality and even better than LoadRunner in some places. As you probably know, LoadRunner is lots of money. Thus, eTest Suite seems to be a much much better value than Astra.
In my studies I had to evaluate both e-test and Quick Test for our "automated tool". We have nothing more than Web Applications with a LOT of applets. I couldn't get e-test to work with any of our "stateless" objects. Furthermore, when dealing with the people from Emperix, they wanted confirmation that we would in fact buy the product before they would lift a finger to prove that they could get it to work, nor would they send their people onsite to take a look at the problem. Mercury had no problem sending someone out to look at this problem and after 2 quick days and a webx session across the world with an engineer they solved all my problems. Yes Mercury does in fact cost a little more, however if you are looking for better support and a better overall business practice go with the industry standard! NOT a wanna be!
We have had great success in our shop. We paid for E-Test Suite however and the support from Empirix has been OUTSTANDING. We've found E-test suite to be superior to Astra and several other products. The comment equating it to be "as good" as load runner is pretty accurate with this exception. E-test suite's design and purpose is specific to web based applications and e-commerce applications. Scripting is easy and straightforward as well. It also records very cleanly with the ability to modify in detail by including your own scriping on top of, in conjunction with or instead of the recorded actions.
I guess I sound satisfied don't I? Never met a SQA person that is satisfied, but we've had good success using the Empirix testing tool set