Squish dropped out relatively early. From the user's point of view test cases, also in complex scenarios, could just be generated by QF-Test.
|AUT started as part of the testcase||No||Yes|
|Testcases can be versioned||Yes||No (but testcases are stored in XML => versioning by CVS possible)|
|Batch execution possible (needed for nightly build integration)||Yes (but complex as project database needs to be available)||Yes|
|Ant Targets available||Yes (ANT integration with exec task possible)||Yes (ANT integration with exec task possible)|
|Separation of logical and physical components||Yes||No|
|If-when-else-conditions||No (can be reached by using event handlers)||Yes|
|More than one AUT possible (SMS + POS)||No (planned for Q1/2010)||Yes|
|Database integration||No (database scripts can be executed as external tasks)||Yes|
|Support of Script languages||No (Scripts can be executed as external tasks)||Yes (Jython, Groovy)|
|Properties can be used to pass parameters into the testsuite||No (Excel-Files can be used)||Yes|
Evaluation: Squish vs. GUIdancer vs. QF-Test: From the user's point of view test cases, also in complex scenarios, could just be generated by QF-Test, Squish dropped out relatively fast - Sebastian Behrens, Micros Retail (former Torex), Berlin.
(Original German texts and citations are translated into English.)