I have gone recently through the process of choosing a GUI testing solution, and finally decided to go to TestAutomationFX. Here are the main reasons I made this choice:
It's creating real code (in my case C#), which is invaluable for me: for maintenability, archivability, flexibility and so on. It is much easier to write in C# (I can ask my developers for support) than in a proprietary script language I would have to learn from scratch (or worse: endless grids of non-maintanable dropboxes). It also lets me build a good testing framework
It has seamless integration with NUnit (that my team uses for unit and integration tests). My data driven test come from the same CSVs, and GUI test reports are just appended to unit test reports, granting easy archiving and maintenance
It has much better recognition of the complex UI objects my developers use (Telerik, Infragistic, home-made): 25% of my clics are in x/y mode, versus 67% with TestComplete or Ranorex
Their sales engineers gave me excellent support (at least during the evaluation period)
It has no major bugs nor complex license setup (yes, I'm looking at you, TestComplete guys, see my other post), no runtime license issue, no virtual machine licensing problems either
(though this was not that important to me), it's four times cheaper than other commercial solutions
On the other hand, there is a medium flaw in the application:
The mapping system (ie. mapping AUT-object properties to Test-application-objects) is really touchy: code refactoring needs special attention. I overcome this by commiting to my VCS before every code refactoring. Anyway, does testComplete provide the option of code refactoring.
OK, as you can see, I'm pretty ethusiast with this solution. I've been using it for only a few days, and may run into bigger problems later. But right now it gives me exactly what I wanted, so let me be happy :)
一个 Wiki 页面，其中概述了各种测试软件。它不会比较它们，但您可以在那里找到Test Automation FX，尽管它没有提供很多信息。它似乎仅限于测试 Windows GUI。 TestComplete 提供更多信息。话又说回来，与 Wiki 相比，它还支持更多。确实还有很多。足以解释为什么这么贵了...
The company I work for uses SilkTest, which works very good. In general, when using automated testing, you would be doing lots of regression testing. What is more important is when you've modified an existing project, then the test software must still be able to run those tests without any errors. (Or, with the errors you'd expect.)
But the market does have lots and lots of other test solutions. In the past, I even saw a test setup which required two computers and additional hardware. The hardware would connect to the monitor, mouse and keyboard of the test system. The other end would connect to a special extension card in the test server. The hardware was there so the server could send keyboard commands to the test system and record anything that happened on the screen. With some additional OCR software, it was very well capable of analysing any errors. Then again, it had a price of six digits and to be honest, I'd rather buy a Porsche for that price and probably would have some cash left to bring two beautiful dates with me while driving through the boulevards in Nice, France...
There's a Wiki page with an overview of all kinds of test software. It doesn't compare them but you can find Test Automation FX there, although it doesn't provide much information. It seems limited to testing Windows GUI's only. TestComplete provides more information. Then again, comparing the Wiki's it also supports a lot more. Really a lot more. Enough to explain why it's that expensive...
现在我不知道应该使用哪个。 Ranorex 比 Test Automation FX 稍好一些，但两者都缺乏对 DevExpress 组件的全面支持。 TestComplete 很好，但它为开发引入了一种新语言，而且非常昂贵。但测试脚本很小，程序在寻找非常值得点击的方面有更多的逻辑。
I have just starting to evaluate different GUI automate testing tool. I have looked at Test Automation FX, Ranorex and TestComplete. And the price for the software are in that order.
This is some of my conclusions:
Test Automation FX - Coded in C#, Fully VS integrated. But very slow in finding components and takes much memory and don't fully support DevExpress components
Ranorex - Coded in C#, Have a studio for maintating test but can be fully integrated into VS. Has better object support. And you can find objects in your software by regex expresseion on several thing. Have some problem with DevExpress components but is rather fast to work with.
TestComplete - Uses its on script language. VBscript is the easiest one (C#Script is just awkward notation). This have really good support for DevExpress components and runs the test really fast. But is very expemsive
Right now I don't know which I should use. Ranorex is alite better than Test Automation FX but both lack the full support for DevExpress components. TestComplete is nice but it introduce a new language to the development and is very expensive. But the test scripts are small and the program have more logic in finding very to click.
I have evaluated Test Automation Fx, Although it recognizes all the controls of my application (we use 3rd party controls from infragistics ie netAdvantage controls for WPF) It is very slow in recognizing the controls and even playback time is quite slow compared to QTP or Ranorex. I would recommend Ranorex over Test Automation Fx.
发布评论
评论（4）
我最近经历了选择GUI测试解决方案的过程，最后决定去TestAutomationFX。以下是我做出此选择的主要原因：
另一方面，应用程序中存在一个中等缺陷：
好的，正如您所看到的，我非常喜欢这个解决方案。我只使用了几天，以后可能会遇到更大的问题。但现在它给了我正是我想要的，所以让我高兴吧:)
I have gone recently through the process of choosing a GUI testing solution, and finally decided to go to TestAutomationFX. Here are the main reasons I made this choice:
On the other hand, there is a medium flaw in the application:
OK, as you can see, I'm pretty ethusiast with this solution. I've been using it for only a few days, and may run into bigger problems later. But right now it gives me exactly what I wanted, so let me be happy :)
我工作的公司使用 SilkTest，效果非常好。一般来说，在使用自动化测试时，您会进行大量的回归测试。更重要的是，当您修改现有项目时，测试软件仍然必须能够运行这些测试而不会出现任何错误。 （或者，带有您期望的错误。）
但是市场上确实有很多很多其他测试解决方案。过去，我什至看到需要两台计算机和额外硬件的测试设置。硬件将连接到测试系统的显示器、鼠标和键盘。另一端将连接到测试服务器中的特殊扩展卡。硬件就在那里，因此服务器可以向测试系统发送键盘命令并记录屏幕上发生的任何情况。借助一些附加的 OCR 软件，它能够很好地分析任何错误。话又说回来，它的价格是六位数，说实话，我宁愿以这个价格买一辆保时捷，而且可能还会剩下一些现金，以便在开车穿过法国尼斯的林荫大道时带着两个美丽的约会对象。有
一个 Wiki 页面，其中概述了各种测试软件。它不会比较它们，但您可以在那里找到Test Automation FX，尽管它没有提供很多信息。它似乎仅限于测试 Windows GUI。
TestComplete 提供更多信息。话又说回来，与 Wiki 相比，它还支持更多。确实还有很多。足以解释为什么这么贵了...
The company I work for uses SilkTest, which works very good. In general, when using automated testing, you would be doing lots of regression testing. What is more important is when you've modified an existing project, then the test software must still be able to run those tests without any errors. (Or, with the errors you'd expect.)
But the market does have lots and lots of other test solutions. In the past, I even saw a test setup which required two computers and additional hardware. The hardware would connect to the monitor, mouse and keyboard of the test system. The other end would connect to a special extension card in the test server. The hardware was there so the server could send keyboard commands to the test system and record anything that happened on the screen. With some additional OCR software, it was very well capable of analysing any errors. Then again, it had a price of six digits and to be honest, I'd rather buy a Porsche for that price and probably would have some cash left to bring two beautiful dates with me while driving through the boulevards in Nice, France...
There's a Wiki page with an overview of all kinds of test software. It doesn't compare them but you can find Test Automation FX there, although it doesn't provide much information. It seems limited to testing Windows GUI's only.
TestComplete provides more information. Then again, comparing the Wiki's it also supports a lot more. Really a lot more. Enough to explain why it's that expensive...
我刚刚开始评估不同的 GUI 自动化测试工具。我研究过 Test Automation FX、Ranorex 和 TestComplete。软件的价格也按此顺序排列。
这是我的一些结论：
测试自动化 FX - 用 C# 编码，完全集成 VS。但查找组件非常慢，占用大量内存，并且不完全支持 DevExpress 组件
Ranorex - 用 C# 编写，有一个用于维护测试的工作室，但可以完全集成到 VS 中。具有更好的对象支持。您可以通过正则表达式在多个事物上查找软件中的对象。 DevExpress 组件存在一些问题，但使用起来相当快。
TestComplete - 使用其脚本语言。 VBscript 是最简单的一种（C#Script 只是一种尴尬的表示法）。这对 DevExpress 组件有很好的支持，并且测试运行速度非常快。但非常昂贵，
现在我不知道应该使用哪个。 Ranorex 比 Test Automation FX 稍好一些，但两者都缺乏对 DevExpress 组件的全面支持。 TestComplete 很好，但它为开发引入了一种新语言，而且非常昂贵。但测试脚本很小，程序在寻找非常值得点击的方面有更多的逻辑。
I have just starting to evaluate different GUI automate testing tool. I have looked at Test Automation FX, Ranorex and TestComplete. And the price for the software are in that order.
This is some of my conclusions:
Test Automation FX - Coded in C#, Fully VS integrated. But very slow in finding components and takes much memory and don't fully support DevExpress components
Ranorex - Coded in C#, Have a studio for maintating test but can be fully integrated into VS. Has better object support. And you can find objects in your software by regex expresseion on several thing. Have some problem with DevExpress components but is rather fast to work with.
TestComplete - Uses its on script language. VBscript is the easiest one (C#Script is just awkward notation). This have really good support for DevExpress components and runs the test really fast. But is very expemsive
Right now I don't know which I should use. Ranorex is alite better than Test Automation FX but both lack the full support for DevExpress components. TestComplete is nice but it introduce a new language to the development and is very expensive. But the test scripts are small and the program have more logic in finding very to click.
我已经评估了 Test Automation Fx，尽管它可以识别我的应用程序的所有控件（我们使用来自 infragistics 的第 3 方控件，即 WPF 的 netAdvantage 控件）
与 QTP 或 Ranorex 相比，它识别控件的速度非常慢，甚至播放时间也很慢。我会推荐 Ranorex 而不是 Test Automation Fx。
I have evaluated Test Automation Fx, Although it recognizes all the controls of my application (we use 3rd party controls from infragistics ie netAdvantage controls for WPF)
It is very slow in recognizing the controls and even playback time is quite slow compared to QTP or Ranorex. I would recommend Ranorex over Test Automation Fx.