Appium vs. Perfecto by Perforce vs. TestComplete

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

Incentivized

Same test case scripts can be executed on different mobiles irrespective of operating systems and language it supports. This covers a wide range of devices (Android, iOS, Blackberry etc) on which automated testing can be performed in very less time. The test scripts are written written using keyword-based Script Once Technology. The creation of scripts are easy. It saves time and effort. Repetitive testing on each iteration would be now be less tedious. This would also allow QA to focus on quality. It would expand test case coverage in the application and finally release reliable/robust application. In all, improving the app quality.

Incentivized

Best suited to smaller unit test or tests broken up, couple of forms at a time Not suited - larger regressions test involving multiple systems. - my main regression involving payments has been unsuccessful for the last 3 years despite all working fine separately and while being watched

• 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.

Incentivized

• Impressive UI
• Strong support system
• Wide variety of devices

Incentivized

• Identifying UI objects and application structure
• Expandability of tests through scripts and script extensions/plugins
• low barrier of entry (you can get started quickly, and other's don't need much explanation to contribute on a basic level)
• Possibility of Jira integration for reporting
• Relatively few (and usually easy to solve) git conflicts when working simultaneously
• easy handling of test data, also for iterative tests

Incentivized

• 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.

Incentivized

• It has a lot of room for improvements in terms of reporting and integration with other reporting and defect tools.
• It should have the capability of capturing charts data.
• It should be able to do some scenarios that only manual testers can do. Like - use of camera and touch ID features.

Incentivized

• TestComplete could stand to have a simplified view for different types of users. For instance, as a manager/architecture guy, I'm not so interested in getting into the code and am more interested in file-based interactions.
• TestComplete could use more integration with reporting for things like TeamCity to improve test status visibility.

Incentivized

I am rating 10/10 because Appium can use with multiple programming languages with multiple Test engines. Also, it works for both Android and iOS.

Incentivized

We have bigger test automation pack using test complete at the same time we also think this is not good performing tool for large number of test automation scripts.

Incentivized

I would like to give 9/10 rating to Appium because of it can easily integrate with popular frameworks and CI/CD tools, as well as it is reliable, flexible and easy to use. The setup can bit complex in initial step, but once on configured it's very easy to use and enables stable and scalable mobile automation for real and cloud devices.

Incentivized

It is usable when you become accustomed to its quirks. Not using it for two months and then you need to re-learn the quirks for some features (but some quirks are so awful that they will never fade from your memory). So, when using it regularly, it is possible to be quite productive, if no big correction in name mapping is needed.

Incentivized

Some bugs were quickly resolved, but most UX quirks of the tool are just marked "as designed". No follow up for enhancement request.

Incentivized

If you develop a mobile application and your testing process goes in cloud, probably you will face a problem - how to implement a stable connection between your mobile devices and testing servers

Incentivized

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.

Incentivized

Perfecto has a wide array of mobile devices we can chose from. Automation is easier using OCR technology. The test script generated detailed report of the executed test script at the end with vast variety of information such as actual results, screen captures in digital format, continuous video recording of the entire script and graphs showing statistics about the execution

Incentivized

TestComplete stacks up against them in terms of GUI and seamless performance. It records each and every step and action been performed in the application and produces a detailed report in a well-structured manner. It can connect and access seamlessly among various databases directly to speed up the testing process.

Incentivized

• 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.

Incentivized

• Since the devices are over cloud, it saves a lot of investment on mobile testing.
• Can be used by testers across the globe.

Incentivized

• Saves hundreds of man-hours with either QA testing or data entry
• With the small cost of the product, it has saved the company money with both employee costs as well as the cost of mistakes made by human error or software bugs

Incentivized