BrowserStack vs. Ghost Inspector

BrowserStack is very useful if you need to troubleshoot a client's reported experience from using an older device or browser version that you do not own and can not personally replicate in-house. For instance, if you are in a Windows environment and your client has a Mac, or if you have iPhones and they have Android. It's also great for ensuring that above-the-fold content is presented effectively across a variety of mobile devices and optimizing visitor experiences. If you are a small business with lower client volumes where these services are needed, then the price point may be high.

1. It's amazing for all kinds of browser testing. 2. Very easy to use and you can implement it to cover your tests in a short time. 3. You don't need to be a coding guru, many stuff are autogenerated or builtin and can be easily implemented without huge efforts 4. Reporting and UI is easy to understand and navigate through

Incentivized

• Tests Android and iOS on real devices on cloud, without the need to purchase the devices.
• Run Maestro tests and other frameworks on real devices, reporting the errors to be fixed to developers or the test workflows that failed to the QA team.
• The quality reports at the end of the tests are really good, because they contain videos of the tests being performed on the devices. So, not only text, I can check the behavior of the application exactly how it runs.

Incentivized

• UI Integration tests
• Asynchronas execution of suites and tests
• Easy way to generate steps of the tests with Chrome plugin

Incentivized

• The documentation needs to improve for browser edge cases, such as "approving permissions automatically". There are several "solutions" posted, none of which worked. I needed to go to Discord to get the real solution.
• Documentation in general seems to provide answers that are unclear or flaky
• There needs to be a more reliable way to programmatically choose device, platform, and window size by being able to query a 'plan' endpoint instead of just 'failing the combination.'

• The number of available integrations is small, but I see more integrations are coming on the way
• Provide builtin alerting system in case of test failures
• Improve provide more roles not only user and administrator. A viewer role for example

Incentivized

It's almost the 3rd year for us and it's renewal time for us. So yes, we are already discussing how many licenses we need to increase as users are increasing internally. So it's 100% sure that we are already planning renewal this year as well BrowserStack with live and app automate.

Incentivized

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.

Incentivized

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.

Incentivized

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.

Incentivized

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.

Incentivized

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.

Incentivized

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.

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 among others.

Incentivized

1. Faster in terms of time when building the integration browser tests 2. No or minimum development skills needed. 3. No server management is needed on our end. 4. Covers a lot of browsers and cases 5. Builtin integrations for different stuff like slack and PD 6. Fast and provides asynchronous executions

Incentivized

No Vendors were involved, directly dealt with Browserstack

Incentivized

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

Incentivized

Not used

Incentivized

• 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.

Incentivized

• We saved a lot of money by using this tool instead of purchasing expensive ones
• The implementation of integrations test was supposed to take 6 months of development. With GI it took 2 months only
• Training QA to build integration tests using GI is much less that any other tool that might need development skills

Incentivized