BrowserStack vs. WAVE Web Accessibility Evaluation Tool

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.

Incentivized

This is pretty middle of the road. It does a good job of picking out some of the low-hanging fruit, but it's not going properly evaluate semantic structure and will pop several false positives. Additionally, the tools are incomplete. For instance, the contrast editor will allow you to test your colors with sliders so you can get the closest color that passes; however, that isn't how color palettes work, you generally don't get to change a companies palette without a lot of pain; furthermore, there is no ability to adjust the font-size and both font-size AND color are used to determine contrast requirements. Oh, and they use points VS pixels...nobody is using points on the web even if the ADA uses them in their fairly dated guidelines. Text from the actual contrast editor "Text is present that has a contrast ratio less than 4.5:1, or large text (larger than 18 point or 14 point bold) has a contrast ratio less than 3:1.". 14pt = 18.66 pixels, so I can see their logic even if I don't agree with it

• 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

Incentivized

• Provides report of errors for you
• Explains what needs to be fixed so you know why
• Shows the errors next to each item on your website so you can see which one they mean

Incentivized

• 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

Incentivized

• Sometimes the automated functions miss things or are mis-triggered
• I would like it to link out to more in-depth reading on issues and resolving them
• I would love it if it generated a PDF report to send people.

Incentivized

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

Incentivized

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.

Incentivized

Its always available in our organisation. Just a click away from testing on the exact devices we require.

Incentivized

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'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.

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

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.

Incentivized

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.

Incentivized

For this, I'm speaking specifically to the Siteimprove browser plugin. The Siteimprove plugin: Allows to filter on guideline level Catches a few more errors than WAVE Web Accessibility Evaluation Tool, but comes pretty close But, both do a great job in all other aspects WebAIM shines in its simplicity of overlaying of errors and warnings on the page. I think its real benefit is a lower learning curve on understanding how to use the tool

Incentivized

Not sure about all this billing details, I am not part of that discussion.

Incentivized

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.

Incentivized

Not used

Incentivized

• 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

Incentivized

• It has led us to be more inclusive and accessible in our website
• We have more website visitors
• We have had positive comments about our website in terms of being accessible

Incentivized