AutomationNG vs. PractiTest

AutomationNG is best suited for people with no programming language at all. It is easy to write tests and execute. Cross browser testing feature is the best part of this app. Cross browser testing can be tricky in other tools, but this app handles it very graciously. However, the tests are executed slowly compared to other tools like selenium but that requires programming knowledge

Incentivized

PractiTest works GREAT as a test case repository. It is very easy to gather metrics, filter, and sort based on custom fields. We were able to work with the API to pull our automation results in as well. The support team is always very quick with their responses and monitors the "in-app chat." They are very open to answering questions, providing best practice materials, and looking for additional feedback. If you already have a central location for all of your test cases and testing needs, then I guess you probably wouldn't need to add another. However, PractiTest has high capability and potential, so if it's set up properly you can easily save time managing your tests.

Incentivized

• Doesnt require any programming knowledge
• Test cases are written in simple English-like
• Cross browser testing is supported and is easy to perform
• Integration with Jira
• Takes significantly less time to write test scripts

Incentivized

• Effective Test case template.
• Can integrate with different Atlassian products.
• Report generation.

Incentivized

• UI is pretty outdated and needs major revamp
• Test results UI can be improved
• Speed of automation can be improved

Incentivized

• Linking the defect with Jira throws an error quite some times which can be improved in the future.

Incentivized

The chat button is available to anyone who logs into PractiTest. In my experience, the support has always been very quick, very friendly, and very thorough. They make sure that your question is answered in a way that you understand it. They also provide documentation of best practices so you are never left hanging on what to do next.

Incentivized

I've used many different Test Case Repository tools, and while each of them has its perks, I like the capabilities of PractiTest best. When creating a test in qTest for example, you can only input information into the fields provided, and you have everything set up in a folder tree structure. With PractiTest, we are able to create custom fields and filter our tests based on those fields to provide more accurate information in a readily available format while quickly searching for the filter instead of through a folder tree. TestRail did not appear to meet our needs as a company. It just didn't have the potential that we found with PractiTest. Zephyr for example worked seamlessly with Jira, which is really nice since that is what we use for the most part. However since we cater to many different clients, we needed an external Test Case repository so we could use something that wasn't tied to 1 Jira instance.

Incentivized

• Easy to write the test cases hence saves lot of time.
• Helps us to manage the tests and identify bugs quite early
• Cross browser testing is a major feature

Incentivized

• Test Reporting
• Defect Management

Incentivized