accessiBe is a fully automated, AI-powered, web accessibility solution for ADA and WCAG compliance.
$49
per month
BrowserStack
Score 8.4 out of 10
N/A
BrowserStack is a test platform built for developers and QAs to expand test coverage, scale and optimize testing with cross-browser, real device cloud, accessibility, visual testing, test management, and test observability. BrowserStack states it currently powers over a billion tests a year for customers who include Amazon, Paypal, Well Fargo Bank, Nvidia, MongoDB, Pfizer, GE, Discovery, React JS, Apache, JQuery and several others rely on BrowserStack to test their web and mobile apps.
$0
per month Unlimited users and 5000 free screenshots
Pricing
accessiBe
BrowserStack
Editions & Modules
Standard
$49
per month
Large
$149
per month
Huge
$199
per month
Enterprise
custom pricing
Percy - Free
$0
per month Unlimited users and 5000 free screenshots
App Percy - Free
$0
per month 5000 free screenshots and 100 minutes of infrastructure
We have not used any other ADA plugins. We did evaluate what was available from custom coding - which would have been far too expensive to WordPress plugins that were not fully supported. When you see what is available and weigh the pros/cons of other service providers there …
AccessiBe seems to have a program of constantly improving and adding to its platform. They are one of the few providers that offer to provide litigation support if a client needs help from demand letters or complaints about sites not being compliant. They provide free website …
After trying a few products, we have come to the conclusion that accessiBe has better automation and regular updates to improve the over site accessibility and compliance. No doubt, Siteimprove has turned out to be great, but its UI might not be as good as a non-technical user …
I tried Userway, but it does not work well as accessiBe. Userway only grants minor changes to design to the website and accommodates fewer disabilities. Their changes are mostly for visuals and not structural to web accessibility.
The main factor contributing to the adoption of BrowserStack over the others we tested is its ease of adaptation. This tool doesn't require much training to adapt. Onboarding is faster, and UAECases testing is very fast, as it includes parallel testing automation capabilities.
Chrome DevTools is free, but it takes a lot of time to manually switch devices/models, etc. And it doesn't let you switch to another system or browser (of course). When we did use it more, we'd also have to find other Chrome extensions to make up for things it didn't have built …
We used LambdaTest, but ultimately it didn't work for us because it put us in a queue when we kicked off a testing job instead of starting immediately. Our continuous integration process is managed by Microsoft Azure DevOps, and the pipeline agents it provides have a 60-minute …
It had all of the features we needed. The user interface is clean and accessible. AWS Device Farm was clunky, slow, and hard to use AND offered very little automation options / APIs.
We really needed a solution that could become part of an automated testing pipeline and …
BrowserStack is simpler and more user friendly than Sauce Labs and can be easily learned by any individual who is new to it and does not require much efforts. Also, BrowserStack is more trusted by the clients that we offer services to, and is always considered the best option …
BrowserStack is much compact and faster compared to katalon studio for mobile testing and supporting a lot of emulators compared to katalon.The licensing cost is also better compared to katalon and the user base of BrowserStack is high with official documentation well in place …
BrowserStack is often favored for its broader device coverage, ease of use, and strong local testing, while Sauce Labs shines with deeper analytics (video, network capture), AI-driven features, and robust performance for large-scale automation, especially for mobile/desktop …
well is a better option for doing testing. I used only Snagit for simple things in documentation, but usinga browser is more complete for the process of doing a large number of test cases. Snagit can crash your system with a lot of pictures, but a browser doesn't do it …
I actually tried BitBar back when they were still called CrossBrowserTesting. They offered a free trial when Browserstack got hacked in 2014. I wasn't a huge fan of their service vs Browserstack, mainly because the UI was less intuitive. I ultimately ended up going back to …
BrowserStack provided similar features at a lower cost than any other platform. All features surpass those of our competitors. Support from the BrowserStack team is awesome.
I chose BrowserStack over Playwright because it was far more simpler to test test cases, builds were already set up and was just right because our web application was not as complex as others. We also used it because of the text and image validation which is what we really …
Using accessiBe is a no-brainer for any website. It stands head and shoulders above all other tools that would call themselves a competitor. It can be integrated into a website by anyone that has access to the website templates or can manage content in a CMS. The tool will do everything else automatically through the API. It is unobtrusive but super simple to use for the end-user. I can't think of a scenario in which accessiBe would not be appropriate for a website.
As per my experience, BrowserStack is more suited for those organizations that have a remote work culture and also for those who need multiple device testing. Also, it is beneficial for those organizations that do not want to spend more on physical devices, as the devices update frequently in the market. It is not appropriate for those organizations which have lesser need of multi- device testing as the subscription model may not be feasible for them. Also a small organization with less number of employees would not opt for BrowserStack as it would be costlier for them.
Automate alt text image descriptions. Makes websites more accessible to people with visual disabilities. Makes websites more accessible to people with other physical disabilities. Enhances SEO possibilities for websites by implementing alt text for all images. Very user-friendly and plug-and-play for website admins.
Adding a font changer especially for people with Dyslexia.
ability to gather Closed Captions or Read video transcripts.
ability to control videos from the user interface, some embedded videos do not have the option to pause or rewind video.
When viewing video not to be taken away from the site or offer alternatives that are not relevant to the site. Website owners often use embedded videos from YouTube which then offers other videos that are not related. AccessiBe should be able to play the embed link in a separate iframe which can auto-close once the video is over.
I wish it didn't time out so quickly. I often move back and forth between my native Mac OS system and browsers to BrowserStack for Windows browsers and it often times out so I have to start over.
I am not sure why, but when I've been testing in BrowserStack for a long period of time - maybe over a couple of hours, it sometimes gets buggy and unresponsive or slow to respond. It makes it hard to tell if I'm experiencing an issue with the site I'm testing or if it's an issue with BrowserStack.
If I'm wishing for the moon and stars, I'd ask for the ability to use BrowserStack to also test with JAWS screen reader. But I'm happy having NVDA.
It's simply a must-have tool. As a designer, I have to ensure my work is at least functional in older browsers. I also have to ensure that, when I design for mobile devices, any differences between platforms aren't problematic. BrowserStack allows me to test my work in a fraction of the time, with a whole lot more accuracy.
So many options that it can be a little overwhelming, but the core functions are easy to find and use and it's usually not too hard to figure things out for the more complex tasks. Very easy to boot up a device and a specific browser from the dashboard to begin a manual website test.
I rated BrowserStack's availability a 10 because it is consistently reliable, with minimal to no downtime or unplanned outages. The platform is accessible whenever needed, ensuring uninterrupted testing. Its robust infrastructure and proactive monitoring ensure a seamless experience, allowing us to meet deadlines without delays caused by availability issues and all
The tests are fast considering the fact that they're Appium tests. I've seen tests reliably pass or fail when they're supposed to, with next to zero issues on the BrowserStack side of things. Tests launch only seconds after I kick off them off from my CLI.
I've not had much direct interaction with the BrowserStack support team. The help and community are great and we've not run into any issue that has really required us to reach out. I guess having a stable and easy to use system means you may never need to contact support.
Yes, it was online training on meet, and trainer looks like skilled and technical strong, he has covered end to end all the features and he has answers all the queries. because of this trainings we are able to implement it by our own in the organization, thank you for support and training.
It was a quick training from the support of browserstack, it was nice and easy to understand, thanks again for the support given by the team. and regularly I used to receive mails for training from support for any new feature they launch, I was able to spread same training to all my team and dev.
I rated the implementation satisfaction an 8 because while it went smoothly overall, there were some challenges during the initial learning phase and integration with existing tools. Key insights include the importance of providing sufficient training upfront and ensuring seamless integration with other systems to minimize disruptions and improve adoption speed.
AccessiBe seems to have a program of constantly improving and adding to its platform. They are one of the few providers that offer to provide litigation support if a client needs help from demand letters or complaints about sites not being compliant. They provide free website testing and you do not need an account or to be a client to have your site tested.
We used LambdaTest, but ultimately it didn't work for us because it put us in a queue when we kicked off a testing job instead of starting immediately. Our continuous integration process is managed by Microsoft Azure DevOps, and the pipeline agents it provides have a 60-minute timeout. We need immediate tests instead of flipping a coin, which could cause a false positive failure due to timeouts.
I may not be the best person to answer this as I am only using it for 1 department and at 1 site but will still try my best As far as Scalability for Devices for Mobile Automation is concerned, it gets a Solid 10, as the users can run cases on upto 10 device parallel and also have the best choices of devices to choose
Browserstack improved our internal confidence level when it came to signing off on testing
Browserstack improved the confidence level of our clients by decreasing the number of bugs found during PVT and providing an entry level opportunity for our clients to perform UAT using the same tools.