Likelihood to Recommend ACCELQ can support multiple technologies such as web, mobile, API, and mainframe. It’s also suited for SAAS solutions such as Salesforce and addresses challenges such as dynamic HTML. It’s easy to set up, and onboarding is easy, and overall lead time is comparatively less. The overall execution results are captured with screenshots, and it’s easy to debug errors. It has integrations with leading cloud-based desktop and mobile farm services such as Saucelabs, browser stack, etc.; ACCELQ is not developer friendly, and hence the overall adoption for a continuous integration scenario is very limited. If you are using a different test management solution, the integration between accelQ and that tool needs ti to be built and hence requires additional development effort, and it’s buggy too.
Read full review 1. It's open source which supports range of languages, operating systems and languages. Well suited for Android and IOS mobile automation. Supports all kinds of apps, which makes it flexible and robust mobile testing tool 2. It is less appropriate where we need intercept network call to verify the API calls. Extensive coding experience is required to work Appium
Read full review Pros Scriptless and hence coding is easy. Maintenance of the scripts are easy. Learning curve is small. Read full review It uses WebDriver API so it makes it easy to use for former web test automation engineers. It can be managed via the command line via an extensive set of parameters. It handles implicit waits at the server side that is especially valuable in distributed infrastructure. Read full review Cons The tool is not developer friendly and hence adoption across developers is low. The tool does not have an admin console to manage the users centrally. Different types of licensing and it’s all user based and hence pricey. Read full review Element browser sometimes is unreliable and has sporadic fails. Appium running is a bit slow, compared to tests written with Appium and with Espresso or XCTest. Read full review Alternatives Considered When we implemented ACCELQ, we conducted POCs with many similar solutions. Among the tools we pursued at that time, accelQ stood out against Tricentis Tosca and QMetry automation studio. However, subject 7 did better. However, they were still in the nascent stages of building the tool, and hence we did not pick it.
Read full review If you're an Apple developer, you use Xcode. It's practically a forced necessity. For system testing though, it doesn't have to be. You can have your development team focus on unit and integration tests in their platform and another team automate acceptance tests with a language they are more familiar with.
Read full review Return on Investment Overall adoption of an automation tool went up. Migration of existing selenium scripts to ACCELQ was relatively easy and less effort. Lack of overall admin console and hence managing the agents across different execution is difficult. Integration between accelQ and any test management tool can be difficult and buggy in most cases, even though it can be coded. Read full review Appium is open source, so it's free. That's budget friendly right there. The ability to write mobile automation tests has saved considerable time for our manual test team, but that is true with most automation tests. We use Sauce Labs with our other automation, but Appium works great with Sauce Labs, as well, if I needed to run on emulators and simulators. Read full review ScreenShots