Talk:Ranorex Studio

Request edits to fix dead links and unreliable sources

Dear Wikipedia editors:

User:Walter Görlitz has correctly tagged two dead links/unreliable sources on this page: footnotes 5 and 10. There are two additional dead links that are not yet tagged: footnotes 11 and 12. I have a COI with the Ranorex page and so request that another editor make this change as soon as possible.

Please remove the following links:

• Replace footnote 5 with the following source: “A Look at the User Interface Testing with Ranorex”. Jovie Sylvia. iBlog: the Official Indium Blog. 31 August 2017. The URL is below.

http://www.indiumsoft.com/Blog/user-interface-testing-with-ranorex/

• Remove footnote 9; it is a low-quality source.
• Replace footnote 10 with the following source: “Introduction to Ranorex: Components & Features”. Harinder Kaur. BugRaptors. 10 July 2017. The URL is below.

http://www.bugraptors.com/introduction-ranorex-components-features-software-automation-testing/

• Remove footnote 11; however the same material is referenced in footnote 7, page 32.
• Remove footnote 12.

If helpful, here is markup for the proposed inline citations:

<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.indiumsoft.com/Blog/user-interface-testing-with-ranorex/|title=A Look at the User Interface Testing with Ranorex|first=Jovie|last=Sylvia|publisher=iBlog: The Official Indium Blog|date=31 August 2017|accessdate=7 September 2017}}</ref>

<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.bugraptors.com/introduction-ranorex-components-features-software-automation-testing/|title=Introduction to Ranorex: Components & Features|first=Harinder|last=Kaur|publisher=Bugraptors|date=10 July 2017|accessdate=7 September 2017}}</ref>

After these footnote changes, the following material must be changed in the text as it is no longer supported by the existing footnotes:

• In the Main Features section, please remove the following text: “Test Development Environment (called Ranorex Studio) [3] makes code completion, debugging and test project management possible[8]”
• Please remove all material associated with footnote 12 unless another source can be found.
• Remove the Supported testing types section in its entirety
• Under Supported technologies, Windows desktop client applications, replace existing list of applications with the following list: “such as .NET, WPF, Win32, VB6, Java, MFC.”
• Replace “Web Applications” with “Web Technologies”
• Replace the existing list of Web technologies with "such as HTML, HTML5, Javascript, Ajax, Silverlight, Adobe Flash/Flex.”
• Under Mobile Apps, delete MonoTouch, Mono for Android, PhoneGap, and Mobile web testing for iOS. Please leave “Native iOS Apps” and “Native Android Apps” unchanged.
• In the System Environment section, please change the statement “Ranorex supports the following platforms” to “Ranorex runs on Windows and Windows Server,” and use footnote 5 as the source. Or, you may prefer to move this to a sentence in the introduction.
• In the Awards section, please replace the first line “Windows Automation Honors Awards” with “2nd Annual ATI Automation Honors Awards 2010”, and change the footnote number from 11 to 7.

Finally, please remove the template messages from the Ranorex page.

Thank you so much for your help to clean up this article. Jaking01 (talk) 11:00, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

@Walter Görlitz: Given that this request only fixes dead links or low-quality sources, and removes unsourced material, do you think I could go ahead and make the edit myself under the WP:COIU uncontroversial edit policy? It has been 12 days since the original request and no other editors have objected to these changes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaking01 (talk • contribs) 14:26, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Life's busy so I have not had the opportunity to do this work. If you want to make the changes, feel free to. Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:19, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Thank you so much for the reply. I have made the changes as described on the talk page, except that I found the content for references 11 and 12 in the Internet Archive Wayback Machine, so I did not remove them. Instead, I added the archive information to the links. I am going to remove the template messages from the top of the article in a separate edit; please feel free to revert if you believe there are still issues with the sources for this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaking01 (talk • contribs) 19:11, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Ranorex. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130806104122/http://www.toolsjournal.com/testing-articles/item/507-gui-automation-ranorex-a-review to http://www.toolsjournal.com/testing-articles/item/507-gui-automation-ranorex-a-review
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130705132240/http://www.qatestingtools.com/ranorex/ranorex to http://www.qatestingtools.com/ranorex/ranorex

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:23, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Request edits to update the features list and add sources

Hello Wikipedia editors. I would like to update this page with current Ranorex features and additional sources, being sure to follow Wikipedia policies for NPOV and COI editing. I do have a COI with Ranorex which is declared on my user page. I have completed the proposed edits in my sandbox, which is visible at this link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jking/sandbox2. Comparing the oldest version with the newest version is a quick way to see everything that I changed. If you feel that these changes conform to Wikipedia standards and would like to take care of everything in one step, please feel free to copy and paste the contents of my Sandbox2 to the Ranorex page. Otherwise, line-by-line changes are detailed below.

In addition to the text changes, I request that the page itself be renamed from Ranorex to Ranorex Studio, to avoid confusion between the name of the company and the name of the product. I have also created a draft article for the company which is currently in the Draft namespace. It is available at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Ranorex_GmbH Jaking01 (talk) 20:04, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Here are the line-by-line changes to the article. Please feel free to make the changes you feel comfortable about, and then mark the request as partially filled.

• 1. In the Infobox, change the product name from "Ranorex" to "Ranorex Studio"
• 2. In the Infobox, Developer line, please link to the Ranorex GmbH page (currently in draft)

• 3. Change the first sentence in the Introduction: Change the product name from "Ranorex" to "Ranorex Studio."
• 4. Change the first sentence in the Introduction: Remove the word "of" from the phrase "framework for testing of desktop, web-based ...
• 5. Change the first sentence in the Introduction: Add the following reference to the first sentence:

• 6. Change the second sentence in the Introduction as follows: change the product name from "Ranorex" to "Ranorex Studio.
• 7. Change the second sentence in the Introduction as follows: link Ranorex GmbH to the company page, now in draft; change the word "for" to "that develops" and put quotes around "innovative software test automation solutions" and update the reference for this statement as follows:

• 8. Change the third sentence in the Introduction as follows: from "Ranorex does not have a scripting language of its own, instead using standard programming languages such as C# and VB.Net as a base" to "Ranorex Studio supports development of automated test modules using standard programming languages such as C# and VB.NET" with the following source:
• 9. Add the following text to the third sentence in the Introduction: while codeless test automation is supported through capture-and-replay technology.

• 10. In Main features, change the first bullet to read: GUI object recognition: Ranorex Studio uniquely identifies and filters all types of GUI elements using an expression called the RanoreXPath. Ranorex Spy is a tool that provides the mapping information of each element to its RanoreXPath expression.
• In Main features, change the second bullet to read: * Object-based record and replay: The Ranorex Recorder records a user's interaction with a desktop or web-based application and creates user-maintainable scripts that can be edited with the Ranorex Studio action editor. . The recorded actions are available as both C# and VB.NET code. Record and replay is supported on mobile devices for actions such as key presses and touch gestures.
• 11. In Main features, change the third bullet to read: * Object repository: The Ranorex Repository stores all of the GUI elements in an application for use in test code modules.
• 12. In Main features, delete the bullet about "Flexible Test Automation Interface." This is essentially meaningless.
• 13. In Main features, add a bullet point: Support for image-based recognition in addition to object recognition.
• 14. In Main features, add a bullet point: Data-driven and keyword-driven testing.
• 15. In Main features, add a bullet point: Detailed test reports for quick error detection.
• 16. In Main features, add a bullet point: Test automation library for .NET
• 17. In Main features, add a bullet point: Execution of test modules outside the Ranorex Studio interface: Test suites with Ranorex automatically generate .EXE files that can be used for simple integration into existing environments such as test management tools, continuous integration processes or batch execution scenarios. Tests can be easily run by launching the .EXE file from the command line.

• 18. In Supported technologies, add two sources to the first bullet point, Windows desktop client applications:
• 19. In Supported technologies, second bullet point "Web technologies: add the word "frameworks" following Javascript, add the following sources immediately fllowing the current text: then add Selenium WebDriver
• 20. In Supported technologies, add two sources to the third bullet point, Cross-browser testing:
• 21. In Mobile Apps, add the following sources to the first bullet point iOS:
• 22. In Mobile Apps, add the following sources to the second bullet point Android:
• 23. In Mobile Apps, remove the summary source line at the bottom of this section, now that the sources have been moved to each individual bullet point

• 24. In System environment, first sentence, add "Studio" following "Ranorex", and add the following sources:

• 25. In Awards, first bullet point Windows Automation Honors, replace the dead link with the following archive source:
• 26. In Awards, third bullet point 3rd Annual ATI Automation, revise the reference as follows:
• 27. In Awards, 7th bullet point Finalist in Jolt Awards, revise the reference as follows:
• 28. In Awards, 8th bullet point Constantinus, revise the reference as follows:

References

Jaking01 (talk) 11:46, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

Partially implemented  Spintendo  ᔦᔭ  12:19, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Request edits to update Reception section

Dear Wikipedia editors:

Over time, the reception section on this page has been edited to cite a single source from 2018, and that citation is paraphrased very negatively. To restore a neutral point of view to this section and bring it up-to-date, I request that new information be posted from two sources: The Forrester Wave Report from 2020, and the Gartner Magic Quadrant from 2019.

Below is the text that I suggest, along with the source text from which it is taken.

In its 2020 review of 15 providers of continuous functional test automation suites, Forrester Research stated that Ranorex "offers strong UI automation for desktop and web," with a "wide range of test creation and test automation capabilities," but only on .NET, which is limiting. Forrester's research showed that Ranorex customers were happy with its "automation power, stability, and ease of use," but wanted "more innovation from Ranorex to stay competitive."

In 2019, Ranorex was one of 10 vendors evaluated in the Gartner Magic Quadrant for Software Test Automation. Gartner identified Ranorex as a "Niche Player." Gartner said Ranorex as "a solid product that it primarily sells directly to developers and testers," and recommended Ranorex for those "looking for strong test automation support for a wide range of technologies."

For reference, the original text of the Forrester Wave Report regarding Ranorex is below. It is also available as a PDF at https://saucelabs.com/assets/BwlQN8rkuvlGxb6tDnK0y/badbce9fbc0c33abcbec0a3f42dde1c0/The_Forrester_Wave_Contin.pdf

Ranorex offers strong UI automation for desktop and web only on .NET. Ranorex has high customer satisfaction, but its exclusive focus on the .NET world is limiting. It offers stable automation for various technologies, and a few other vendors have partnered with Ranorex to fill their gaps on the .NET platform for functional automation. It offers a wide range of test creation and test automation capabilities from record and playback to a scriptless test automation and scripting/coding one. Those options enable some business testers but mostly technical and developer testers. Idera recently acquired the vendor and has not yet released significant innovation and evolution plans. Integration with Idera’s test management tool TestRail and CI/CD TravisCI are still on the roadmap.

Ranorex could extend technology coverage outside the .NET world for less-technical personas. Its goal is to support all popular programming languages using the W3C automation standard WebDriver and offer automation support using plug-ins for the most popular IDEs. Plans also include providing seamless support for BDD. Reference clients are very happy with the automation power, stability, and ease of use but want more innovation from Ranorex to stay competitive. It is definitely a tool for .NET application development testers and enterprise goals that include complementary test vendors

Here is the original text of the 2019 Gartner Magic Quadrant regarding Ranorex Studio. It is available at https://www.gartner.com/en/documents/3975493/magic-quadrant-for-software-test-automation

Ranorex is a Niche Player. The company has a solid product that it primarily sells directly to developers and testers. It has not yet fully leveraged the greater global presence and additional quality assets of its parent company IDERA. Consider Ranorex if you are looking for strong test automation support for a wide range of technologies.

Ranorex’s test automation offering consists of Ranorex Studio — supporting testing for desktop, web and mobile applications....Ranorex Studio offers a keyword-driven option for test creation or scripting in C# or .NET. It also offers offline test execution by embedding tests in a stand-alone executable. [Ranorex Studio] can easily be integrated with a variety of ADLM and DevOps tools.

The following is paraphrased from the original: Under strengths, Gartner identified broad technology support, a compelling product with good customer service, strong technical support and fast response times. Gartner also listed a straightforward and easy-to-use testing option for developers that have sold integrations with common developer tools.

Under cautions, Gartner pointed to the lack of an API testing solution and support for service virtualization. Gartner also noted a web-driven sales model and "average suitability for nontechnical role skills."

--Jaking01 (talk) 19:29, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Review of edits to "Reception Section"

Hello User:Walter_Görlitz ,

If I understand correctly, you will accept the suggested edits to the Ranorex page if I add where they ranked Ranorex in relation to other vendors, and the content is neutral, with no "marketing" language about Ranorex that isn't a direct quote from the analyst? Ranorex Studio receives good marks for what it is -- a .NET-based GUI automation tool; but the scorecard used by the big analysts give preference to comprehensive suites with an enterprise focus and lots of sales & marketing channels. Gartner themselves say that a ranking of "Niche" doesn't mean that a tool isn't good -- just that it has a narrow focus.

In its 2020 review of 15 providers of continuous functional test automation suites, Forrester Research positioned Ranorex Studio as a "Challenger", based on its narrow focus as a Windows-based GUI automation tool. Forrester scored Ranorex Studio's GUI design and automation capabilities as average among the 15 tools analyzed, but ranked Ranorex lowest overall due to its lack of features such as API testing, automation execution, and support for operating environments. Forrester's report started that Ranorex "offers strong UI automation for desktop and web," with a "wide range of test creation and test automation capabilities," but only on .NET, which is limiting. Forrester's research showed that Ranorex customers were happy with its "automation power, stability, and ease of use," but wanted "more innovation from Ranorex to stay competitive."

In 2019, Ranorex was one of 10 vendors evaluated in the Gartner Magic Quadrant for Software Test Automation. Gartner identified Ranorex as a "Niche Player" due to its narrow focus on GUI test automation. Gartner described Ranorex as "a solid product that it primarily sells directly to developers and testers. . .looking for strong test automation support for a wide range of technologies." Jaking01 (talk) 15:10, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for updating here. I'm not a moderator or an admin so you're not making suggestions to or for me, but this article is on my watchlist and I noticed first that the information was added in reverse chronological order. When I went in to edit, I saw the direct quotes and know that Gartner is not fond of their (copyrighted) material being shared—they have gone so far as to delete entire paragraphs where they exist.

We really just want plain details, not MOS:PEACOCK terms. So calling it a challenger doesn't meet that standard. The linked MoS page gives examples of how to avoid that. So with the 2020 review, rather than using that term, the subsequent sentence is helpful. Again, the direct quote might cause problems. If you don not mind me re-ordering the sections, and a bit of editing, I don't mind adding some of that new content. Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:13, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

References