BrowserStack vs. Tuskr

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.

Incentivized

Tuskr works well for teams that want a straightforward test management solution without a steep learning curve. It's especially useful for Agile projects where frequent testing and collaboration are important. Teams looking for extensive enterprise-level customization or highly advanced reporting may find some limitations, but for day-to-day QA management, it performs very well.

• Test client website on 5x more platform.
• Provide a real device with features like media injection and Physical SIM testing for manual testing of a specific feature.
• Automate regression suite to execute parallel on multiple device.
• Provide an accessibility report for the website through automated scanning of the site using site.xml.

Incentivized

• Its easy to import test cases in Tuskr by using the csv import feature
• Test runs are easy to create and can include test cases from multiple suits.
• Reports of test runs make it easier to track all the cases that were covered at a particular instance before giving a release signoff.

Incentivized

• 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.

• When you click into a specific test, the status automatically clears. it would be nice for this to be preserved when clicking in instead of clearing
• It would be nice to be able to add comments specific to certain steps in each test, instead of just one big comment box
• Since we use Tuskr for QA, we structure it as a table with instructions and expected results. because these are side by side, sometimes it is hard to go in a step-by-step order when there are multiple QA steps to take to complete the test.

Incentivized

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.

Tuskr suits our organization needs

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

The Tuskr App, overall rating depends on its easeiest way to use as their features and managment tool are too good. If you need a easier tool and cost-effective tool and a lot of feature in it. and its return of investment is very good. And the software is really ease to adapt

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.

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 have not worked with related testing suite before but Tuskr has been the favorite platform for running test suites. It has generated positive leads from the company data by offering the necessary testing support. It is easy to integrate with other applications to suit business demands. The system generate results from various testing suites that can shared with our clients.

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

• 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

• Everyone in the team can go and read how to perform a specific test and note down the result of it which can be viewed by anyone
• We can filter based on results understanding what test cases are failing from previous runs
• Helps save a lot of time, effort and minimises future issues

Incentivized