We apologize for a recent technical issue with our email system, which temporarily affected account activations. Accounts have now been activated. Authors may proceed with paper submissions. PhDFocusTM
CFP last date
20 December 2024
Call for Paper
January Edition
IJCA solicits high quality original research papers for the upcoming January edition of the journal. The last date of research paper submission is 20 December 2024

Submit your paper
Know more
The week's pick
Responsive image
Improved Shuffled Frog Leaping Algorithm with Self-Adaptive Shuffling for Fuzzy Logic PD+G Controller Optimization in Robotic Manipulators

Duc Hoang Nguyen
Random Articles
Reseach Article

Comparative Study of Automated Testing Tools: TestComplete and QuickTest Pro

by Manjit Kaur, Raj Kumari
journal cover thumbnail

International Journal of Computer Applications
Foundation of Computer Science (FCS), NY, USA
Volume 24 - Number 1
Year of Publication: 2011
Authors: Manjit Kaur, Raj Kumari
10.5120/2918-3844

Manjit Kaur, Raj Kumari . Comparative Study of Automated Testing Tools: TestComplete and QuickTest Pro. International Journal of Computer Applications. 24, 1 ( June 2011), 1-7. DOI=10.5120/2918-3844

@article{ 10.5120/2918-3844,
author = { Manjit Kaur, Raj Kumari },
title = { Comparative Study of Automated Testing Tools: TestComplete and QuickTest Pro },
journal = { International Journal of Computer Applications },
issue_date = { June 2011 },
volume = { 24 },
number = { 1 },
month = { June },
year = { 2011 },
issn = { 0975-8887 },
pages = { 1-7 },
numpages = {9},
url = { https://ijcaonline.org/archives/volume24/number1/2918-3844/ },
doi = { 10.5120/2918-3844 },
publisher = {Foundation of Computer Science (FCS), NY, USA},
address = {New York, USA}
}
%0 Journal Article
%1 2024-02-06T20:09:49.229314+05:30
%A Manjit Kaur
%A Raj Kumari
%T Comparative Study of Automated Testing Tools: TestComplete and QuickTest Pro
%J International Journal of Computer Applications
%@ 0975-8887
%V 24
%N 1
%P 1-7
%D 2011
%I Foundation of Computer Science (FCS), NY, USA
Abstract

Testing automation tools enables developers and testers to easily automate the entire process of testing in software development. The objective of the paper is to conduct a comparative study of automated tools such as the Mercury QuickTest Professional and the AutomatedQA TestComplete based on criteria such as the efforts involved with generating test scripts, capability to playback the scripts, result reports, speed and cost. The fundamental goal is to analyze the features supported by these two functional testing tools that aid in minimizing the resources in script maintenance and increasing efficiency for script reuse. For the purpose of this project we took an existing VB based application that was inventory management and perform functional testing on it by these two automated testing tools.

References
  1. Innovative approaches of automated tools in software testing and current technology as compared to manual testing, Global journal of enterprise of information system, jan 2009-june 2009.
  2. Manual Testing - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manual_testing
  3. Software Test Automation - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Test_automation
  4. Quick Test Professional entry in Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org./wiki/HP_QuickTest_Professional
  5. Mercury Quick Test Professional tutorial, version 8.0. Mercury Interactive Corporation, Documentation, 2004.
  6. Lino Tadros - Falafel Software Inc., TestComplete user guide, release 2009.
  7. Mike Lutz, Rochester Institute of trchnology, “Testing Tools”, IEEE, 0740-7459/90/0500/0053, May 1990.
  8. Robert M. Poston and Michael P. Sexton, “ Evaluating and selecting Testing Tools”, Symposium on assessment of Quality software Development Tools, IEEE CS Presss, Los Alamitos, Calif., 1992.
  9. R. Tokar and S. Mankefors, “A Survey on Testing and Reuse”, SwSTE’03, IEEE conference, 0-7695-2047-2, 2003
  10. Leckraj Nagowah and Purmanand Roopnah, “AsT -A Simp le Automated System Testing Tool”, IEEE, 978-1-4244-5540-9/10, 2010
  11. Khaled M.Mustafa, Rafa E. Al-Qutaish, Mohammad I. Muhairat, “Cassification of Software testing Tools Based on the Software Testing Methods”, 2009 second International Conference on Computer and Electrical Engineering, 978-0-7695-3925-6, 2009.
  12. Michael Silverstein, “Record and playback at the GUI level can often create more LOGICAL CAPTURE REPLAY”, STQE magazine, Nov-Dec. 2003
  13. Mark Michaelis, “Boon and Bane of GUI Test Automation”, The magazine for professional testers- www.testingexperience.com.
  14. M.Grechanik, q. Xie, and Chen Fu, “Maintaining and Evolving GUI- Directed Test Scripts”, ICSE’09, IEEE, Vancouver, Canada, 978-1-4244-3452-7, May 16-24, 2009.
  15. Alex Cervantes, “Exploring the Use of a Test Automation Framework”, IEEEAC paper #1477, version 2, updated January 9, 2009
  16. A. Ieshin, M. Gerenko, and V. Dmitriev, “Test Automation- Flexible Way”, IEEE, 978-1-4244-5665-9, 2009
Index Terms

Computer Science
Information Sciences

Keywords

QuickTest Professional TestComplete

Powered by PhDFocusTM