Logo QF-Test

QF-Test vs. Squish

 

Free Trial  Download  Buy

The largest deciding factor was that QF-Test may sometimes force-focus the SUT.

Logan White Stack of R.J. Lee Group

Why we chose QF-Test over Squish?

QF-Test Evaluation Report of R.J. Lee Group

The QF-Test team asked me how we chose & use QF-Test here at RJ Lee Group. I researched about a dozen GUI testing programs; only QF-Test and Squish looked like they could meet our needs. I downloaded evaluation versions of both, configured both for our system, and wrote a couple tests in both. I explained both to our manual tester, and let her try them. I also explained both to our lead developer. Then, the three of us discussed it, found that both would fill all our technical needs, then each of us individually chose QF-Test over Squish.

Here`s why:

  • I was able to install QF-Test without a single tech-support e-mail because it has better documentation & code quality. (The manual continues to be very useful, it‘s nicely searchable when I need to reference something)
  • QF-Test‘s widget/component database is more organized than Squish‘s, and allows refactoring widget names with greater ease. This was important to us because our application has many fields, which change name & function as business processes change.
  • Our team lead appreciated that the scripting languages in QF-Test were JVM languages, unlike Squish.
  • Our erstwhile manual-tester, now automating-and-exploring-tester, was more comfortable with QF-Test‘s interface for recording clicks.
  • The largest deciding factor was that QF-Test may sometimes force-focus the SUT, but nobody liked that Squish sent the scripted events to whatever window the OS currently gave focus. With QF we could multi-task while the script ran in the background.

We‘re automating our testing faster than new functionality is added, so testing increases with every release. That‘s much better than the manual testing document that got longer each release :-)

I used Jython scripts to time test actions like searching, opening records, and application startup. The timing results (with build number & host) go in a database, so we can track performance with vastly greater granularity. We also use looped actions to find resource leaks.

I really like scripting in the JVM. Being able to store the contents of a text field in a variable for a later check is great. So is knowing how many items are in a table before and after a filter is applied. As QF-Test becomes more settled into our development environment, I‘m spending more time writing tests in Jython. That‘s the area where I think QF-Test could use some polish. I love what it can do now - but can your engineers get the scripting integration to do anything else cool? I‘m doing things like opening a series of records and finding the average time-to-open, changing each field in a form and checking for exceptions in the log, trying to break the filter by running permutations of search strings, etc.

You guys make a great tool. Thanks,

Logan White Stack of R.J. Lee Group

Why we chose QF-Test over Squish - Logan White Stack, R.J. Lee Group, Monroeville, USA.

Videos Downloads Documentation Buy Free Trial