Likelihood to Recommend I didn't have problems working with BrowserStack. The tool is stable, there are a lot of different devices and OS. It's really useful. I only had a problem in the past while working with a company that had geolocation activated on the app. The app only works in the USA, and I was in Brazil. I faced many many issues working on this circumstances. I tried to get in touch with BrowserStack, but I leave the company before get the problem solved. But that one was the only big problem that I've faced while using BrowserStack.
Read full review It is best suited for implementing the automated test cases in a human readable form so it's easy for non-technical members of the team and stakeholders to understand the test cases, features and the functionalities of the application. Automation of Integration tests and End to End tests are good use case. It is less appropriate or situations where the focus is only on the writing and maintenance of unit tests.
Read full review Pros BrowserStack App Automate dashboard gives us video, screenshots and logs of what exactly happened during the test run. This helps us easily analyse failures in our automation test and figure out the root cause for failures. BrowserStack App Live provides us with lot of devices to test on. This is specifically useful in case of high end iPhone devices which are costly for us to procure in house. BrowserStack App Automate provides parallel threads which can be shared across multiple teams. This has helped us scale our mobile test automation effort across the organisation. In house mobile lab might be cost effective initially but when it comes to maintaining it and add new devices as and when it comes in market makes it less cost effective than cloud solution like BrowserStack Read full review Versatility to be used in combination with different kinds of automated testing like automated performance testing, API testing, UI testing etc. I use JavaScript, Selenium, C#, email testing libraries, database testing libraries in combination with BDD with SpecFlow. I am able to use all these with SpecFlow to make my automation framework to be able to automate any kind of automated testing. It provides different widely used runner options like NUnit, XUnit etc. Before I started to work on establishing proper test automation in my workplace, the previous automation framework (non-BDD based) as well as unit tests used NUnit runner. The transition to using BDD was smooth because we could use the same runner and there were no compatibility issues. The auto-complete feature is good. I use it with Visual Studio as well as Rider and I don't have to recall the entire Gherkin statements. I just type a few words and the entire Gherkin statement implemented in framework is auto-suggested by SpecFlow. It saves time and context switching. Read full review Cons Overall performance of usability of the device Overheating conditions could be a useful feature to be included Downloading the app to the Home screen for quick selection would be helpful Screen orientation feature Tablets for additional devices to be tested against Add in a feature to test against wearables Read full review SpecFlow does not accepts optional input variables in the methods defined during Gherkin statement implementation. Cucumber supports optional input variables in the methods defined during Gherkin statement implementation. The tests identified while using SpecFlow with NUnit removes all white spaces in the scenario names. It makes the tests less readable. If the white spaces are not auto-removed, it would be much better for readability as well as their actual identification in the repository. Read full review Likelihood to Renew This decisions mostly taken by senior management at VP and CEO level, they also need approval from many other teams like dev, design according to the use, and finance due to competitive cost, They do check other product as well, and I am just a single person from QA team, and not a decision maker
Read full review Usability It integrates directly in internal networks and local development. The point and click interface of choosing your device, pick the browser/version and you have a working emulation of that exact environment. What else could you ask for? I've set our least computer savvy users up with BrowserStack for testing in minutes. It feels like it's just part of your local environemnt.
Read full review Reliability and Availability Its always available in our organisation. Just a click away from testing on the exact devices we require.
Read full review Performance 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.
Read full review Support Rating I'm saying a 10 for support for BrowserStack only based on feedback from the development team. I myself have never had to reach out to support for any questions or issues, but others in the company have. From my conversations with them, the support was fantastic and had been a pleasure working with the BrowserStack team.
Read full review In-Person Training 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.
Read full review Online 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.
Read full review Implementation Rating It was new learning for me, till the time I was not aware of such tools are available for manual CBT testing and for automation integration caue I was using some VM for testing, it has increase my knowledge and skill set. It was a fun while implementation and I enjoyed it.
Read full review Alternatives Considered BrowserStack's library of devices and browsers is way bigger than
Chrome DevTools . Additionally, I find that BrowserStack is more accurate than
Chrome DevTools in regards to how pages render on the various devices I need to test on. Overall, BrowserStack is far better than
Chrome DevTools .
Read full review SpecFlow is .Net based which supports C#. Behave is Python based. Cucumber is Java based.
Ghost Inspector is no-code based but provides very limited testing features. We wanted to implement BDD so we rued out using
Ghost Inspector . Most of the developers in my team are C# experts so it was decided for everyone's comfort to go for SpecFlow rather than Behave or Cucumber. It's import to have technical experts in the language of the automation framework because there are many situations where the solutions to the test automation needs are not straightforward and implementing those requires expertise in the related programming language.
Read full review Contract Terms and Pricing Model Not sure about all this billing details, I am not part of that discussion.
Read full review Scalability It provides us with the latest technology in the market, which enable us to make sure that the software we create is accessible on them.
Read full review Professional Services Not used
Read full review Return on Investment Saves a lot of money, by providing several devices at our disposal It gives you devices like, mobile phones, tabs and desktops of various Operating Systems Only Challenge is it might consume more time for development, but testing should be fast and easy Read full review Everyone stays on the same page regarding the behavior of existing functionalities whether it be technical or non-technical individuals. So there is less need for multiple people to get involved which saves time and thus money. Reusing the same code through the implemented Gherkin statement saves test automation time and thus reduces cost. We combine SpecFlow with other opensource testing technologies to make our automation framework more versatile which further saves costs for us. Read full review ScreenShots