Comments for http://qaheaven.com Software QA blog Fri, 27 Aug 2010 02:03:47 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 Comment on HP QTP 9.5 vs AutomatedQA TestComplete 7 by كازينو http://qaheaven.com/?p=57&cpage=1#comment-571 كازينو Fri, 27 Aug 2010 02:03:47 +0000 http://qaheaven.com/?p=57#comment-571 Nevermind, works now! Nevermind, works now!

]]> Comment on HP QTP 9.5 vs AutomatedQA TestComplete 7 by andrei http://qaheaven.com/?p=57&cpage=1#comment-570 andrei Wed, 25 Aug 2010 18:51:26 +0000 http://qaheaven.com/?p=57#comment-570 I totally agree with Chad, now that TC has launched it's new version 8.0 and also the integration with SmartBear and Software Planner, puts QTP into an awkward position. they have to come up with something better than QTP 10.0.....Still a plus for Mercury remains LoadRunner....TC has to work a little bit harder to keep up with Performance Testing I totally agree with Chad, now that TC has launched it’s new version 8.0 and also the integration with SmartBear and Software Planner, puts QTP into an awkward position. they have to come up with something better than QTP 10.0…..Still a plus for Mercury remains LoadRunner….TC has to work a little bit harder to keep up with Performance Testing

]]> Comment on HP QTP 9.5 vs AutomatedQA TestComplete 7 by chad http://qaheaven.com/?p=57&cpage=1#comment-569 chad Wed, 25 Aug 2010 16:33:30 +0000 http://qaheaven.com/?p=57#comment-569 I've worked with both tools for the past 6 years. Hands down TC is the best. I've worked with it since version 3. And even back then it was leaps and bounds far better than QTP. No need for descriptive programming with TC becase it recognizes everything. And more than that it recognized methods and properties of objects to the nth degree. Companies prefer QTP because of the QC integration but that's no longer an issue since AutomatedQA or SmartBear now have Software Planner. it's basically QC. It can also run QTP tests along with TC and other automated tests. HP Mercury is in a world of trouble now. I’ve worked with both tools for the past 6 years. Hands down TC is the best. I’ve worked with it since version 3. And even back then it was leaps and bounds far better than QTP. No need for descriptive programming with TC becase it recognizes everything. And more than that it recognized methods and properties of objects to the nth degree.

Companies prefer QTP because of the QC integration but that’s no longer an issue since AutomatedQA or SmartBear now have Software Planner. it’s basically QC. It can also run QTP tests along with TC and other automated tests.

HP Mercury is in a world of trouble now.

]]> Comment on HP QTP 9.5 vs AutomatedQA TestComplete 7 by كازينو http://qaheaven.com/?p=57&cpage=1#comment-568 كازينو Tue, 24 Aug 2010 01:15:19 +0000 http://qaheaven.com/?p=57#comment-568 Hi guys, tried loading this blog through Google RSS reader and got a strange error message, any ideas what could be the issue? Hi guys, tried loading this blog through Google RSS reader and got a strange error message, any ideas what could be the issue?

]]> Comment on HP QTP 9.5 vs AutomatedQA TestComplete 7 by Jacob http://qaheaven.com/?p=57&cpage=1#comment-563 Jacob Wed, 04 Aug 2010 03:39:12 +0000 http://qaheaven.com/?p=57#comment-563 QTP hands down. Two words: Descriptive Programming. If you are good with vbscript, QTP's automation object model is worthwhile in and of itself. QTP hands down. Two words: Descriptive Programming. If you are good with vbscript, QTP’s automation object model is worthwhile in and of itself.

]]> Comment on Why automated functional testing? by Johncp http://qaheaven.com/?p=44&cpage=1#comment-549 Johncp Mon, 05 Jul 2010 23:36:16 +0000 http://qaheaven.com/?p=44#comment-549 It is useful to try everything in practice anyway and I like that here it's always possible to find something new. :) It is useful to try everything in practice anyway and I like that here it’s always possible to find something new. :)

]]> Comment on HP QTP 9.5 vs AutomatedQA TestComplete 7 by Hiremath http://qaheaven.com/?p=57&cpage=1#comment-404 Hiremath Wed, 21 Apr 2010 12:02:40 +0000 http://qaheaven.com/?p=57#comment-404 TC is a great tool. Every QA Team should have this tool TC is a great tool. Every QA Team should have this tool

]]> Comment on HP QTP 9.5 vs AutomatedQA TestComplete 7 by andrei http://qaheaven.com/?p=57&cpage=1#comment-334 andrei Wed, 07 Apr 2010 10:52:13 +0000 http://qaheaven.com/?p=57#comment-334 Generally, companies used to prefer QTP, because of it's integration with QC. Mercury/HP had the solution before most other Software companies for huge prices. HP currently has to compete on the market with lot more tools and solutions which often offer a more enjoyable experience and support, under a smaller price Generally, companies used to prefer QTP, because of it’s integration with QC. Mercury/HP had the solution before most other Software companies for huge prices. HP currently has to compete on the market with lot more tools and solutions which often offer a more enjoyable experience and support, under a smaller price

]]> Comment on HP QTP 9.5 vs AutomatedQA TestComplete 7 by rajamanickam http://qaheaven.com/?p=57&cpage=1#comment-333 rajamanickam Tue, 06 Apr 2010 10:07:31 +0000 http://qaheaven.com/?p=57#comment-333 TestComplete looks better than QTP from this Comparison. But, just wondering why many companies prefer to use QTP? TestComplete looks better than QTP from this Comparison. But, just wondering why many companies prefer to use QTP?

]]> Comment on HP QTP 9.5 vs AutomatedQA TestComplete 7 by RamaraoGoud Donta http://qaheaven.com/?p=57&cpage=1#comment-288 RamaraoGoud Donta Thu, 25 Mar 2010 06:22:23 +0000 http://qaheaven.com/?p=57#comment-288 I am working on TestComplete from Last 3 Years,Really its a very good tool i have seen till now,It will supports almost all types of Objects and there is no need of using descriptive programming,really its a very excellent tool and easy to learn and there are so many features are there in TestComplete,but QTP has limited feature and i would like to tell about distribution testing in TC,its very very excellent and it saves more time. I am working on TestComplete from Last 3 Years,Really its a very good tool i have seen till now,It will supports almost all types of Objects and there is no need of using descriptive programming,really its a very excellent tool and easy to learn and there are so many features are there in TestComplete,but QTP has limited feature and i would like to tell about distribution testing in TC,its very very excellent and it saves more time.

]]>