Bugzilla vs. TestComplete

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Bugzilla
Score 7.6 out of 10
N/A
N/AN/A
TestComplete
Score 7.0 out of 10
N/A
TestComplete is a GUI test automation tool that enables users of all skill levels to test the UI of every desktop, web, and mobile application. TestComplete is best suited for testers, automation engineers, and QA teams in any industry.
$2,256
per license
Pricing
BugzillaTestComplete
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
Node-Locked Base
2,256
per license
Node-Locked Pro
3,950
per license
Float - Base
5,077
per license
Float - Pro
7,901
per license
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
BugzillaTestComplete
Free Trial
NoYes
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional DetailsPay for only the modules needed. TestComplete Pro includes all three modules: desktop, web, and mobile, at a bundled price point, as well as access to the parallel testing engine, TestExecute. TestComplete has additional add-ons, including TestExecute and the Intelligent Quality Add-On.
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
BugzillaTestComplete
Considered Both Products
Bugzilla

No answer on this topic

TestComplete
Chose TestComplete
Previously I was working on Selenium with Java for automating the test cases/scenarios and to perform regression testing in web applications. And for the last few months, I have been working with TestComplete on automating desktop and web applications. And I like the name …
Top Pros
Top Cons
Best Alternatives
BugzillaTestComplete
Small Businesses
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.9 out of 10
BrowserStack
BrowserStack
Score 8.3 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.9 out of 10
ReadyAPI
ReadyAPI
Score 8.1 out of 10
Enterprises
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.9 out of 10
SoapUI Open Source
SoapUI Open Source
Score 7.8 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
BugzillaTestComplete
Likelihood to Recommend
7.7
(18 ratings)
6.4
(88 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
6.0
(10 ratings)
8.1
(6 ratings)
Usability
9.0
(3 ratings)
7.8
(7 ratings)
Availability
9.0
(3 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Performance
8.0
(2 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
5.1
(3 ratings)
6.6
(7 ratings)
In-Person Training
9.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Implementation Rating
8.0
(2 ratings)
6.7
(4 ratings)
Configurability
9.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Ease of integration
9.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Product Scalability
9.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Vendor post-sale
7.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Vendor pre-sale
8.0
(1 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
BugzillaTestComplete
Likelihood to Recommend
Open Source
Buzilla is easy to use and provides basic functionality to use as a bug tracking tool. If big size attachments are allowed it would have been great. Also with Bugzilla home->Test management area is improved by allowing multiple sections it would be awesome!
Read full review
SmartBear
Best suited to smaller unit test or tests broken up, couple of forms at a time Not suited - larger regressions test involving multiple systems. - my main regression involving payments has been unsuccessful for the last 3 years despite all working fine separately and while being watched
Read full review
Pros
Open Source
  • Open source! No license fee involved, no limit to the number of licenses.
  • Easy to install and maintain. Installation is very easy and hardly needs any maintenance efforts, except when migrating from one version to other. Each project can have its own group of users.
  • Includes all the core features/fields that are needed to log a software bug/issue.
  • Multiple attachments are possible, supports various formats.
  • Good for reporting. Filtering mechanism lets you query bugs by various parameters.
Read full review
SmartBear
  • Identifying UI objects and application structure
  • Expandability of tests through scripts and script extensions/plugins
  • low barrier of entry (you can get started quickly, and other's don't need much explanation to contribute on a basic level)
  • Possibility of Jira integration for reporting
  • Relatively few (and usually easy to solve) git conflicts when working simultaneously
  • easy handling of test data, also for iterative tests
Read full review
Cons
Open Source
  • Cloud Based. I'd like to see bugzilla be cloud based. The company I currently work with made a final decision to change db's for this specific reason. Due to the frequency of travel in this company, they need access to bugzilla from differing national / international locations.
  • Larger File Attachments. I believe the limit of a bugzilla content upload is 4 megabytes. For many of our video'd issues, this file size is simply impractical without the additional effort exertion on video compressor applications.
Read full review
SmartBear
  • TestComplete could stand to have a simplified view for different types of users. For instance, as a manager/architecture guy, I'm not so interested in getting into the code and am more interested in file-based interactions.
  • TestComplete could use more integration with reporting for things like TeamCity to improve test status visibility.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
Open Source
For future projects I will look at something that is hosted in the cloud that I don't have to manage. I would also like something that has a more modern feel to allow my customers to use it as well as my employees.
Read full review
SmartBear
We have bigger test automation pack using test complete at the same time we also think this is not good performing tool for large number of test automation scripts.
Read full review
Usability
Open Source
This is a pretty straightforward system. You put in the bug details, a ticket is created, the team is notified. The user interface reflects this very simple and straightforward flow. It's certainly much easier than trying to track bugs with using Excel and email.
Read full review
SmartBear
It is usable when you become accustomed to its quirks. Not using it for two months and then you need to re-learn the quirks for some features (but some quirks are so awful that they will never fade from your memory). So, when using it regularly, it is possible to be quite productive, if no big correction in name mapping is needed.
Read full review
Reliability and Availability
Open Source
I used it.
Read full review
SmartBear
No answers on this topic
Performance
Open Source
I like this rating.
Read full review
SmartBear
No answers on this topic
Support Rating
Open Source
Since it is open source, it doesn't have customer service. However, the amount of information on forums is vast. If you can wade through it, you'll get what you need
Read full review
SmartBear
Some bugs were quickly resolved, but most UX quirks of the tool are just marked "as designed". No follow up for enhancement request.
Read full review
In-Person Training
Open Source
I know it.
Read full review
SmartBear
No answers on this topic
Implementation Rating
Open Source
Implementation was pretty simple. Particularly because the product cannot be customized so there is not much to do apart from getting it up and running.
Read full review
SmartBear
If you develop a mobile application and your testing process goes in cloud, probably you will face a problem - how to implement a stable connection between your mobile devices and testing servers
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
Open Source
We migrated away from the whole suite of Rational tools because of their massive complexity around administration and inflexibility regarding workflows. In addition, the suite was insanely expensive, and users hated the usability of the tools. We evaluated, and liked JIRA, but because the organization was looking for cost savings, we ended up going with Bugzilla and it's FOSS model so as to avoid ongoing costs.
Read full review
SmartBear
TestComplete stacks up against them in terms of GUI and seamless performance. It records each and every step and action been performed in the application and produces a detailed report in a well-structured manner. It can connect and access seamlessly among various databases directly to speed up the testing process.
Read full review
Scalability
Open Source
I used it
Read full review
SmartBear
No answers on this topic
Return on Investment
Open Source
  • It has made the SDLC process more efficient. Bugs were logged and tracked in emails or in Excel sheets leading to slow communication and at time version issues with multiple files. Being an online tool, Bugzilla solved those issues, improved communication, instant status updates and improved efficiency.
  • We have used Bugzilla with a lot of federal goverment agencies (DHS, CMS, SAMHSA, CDC, HHS etc). Project Directors adn Principle Investigators were at times given access to Bugzilla which provided a snapshot of open vs closed issues.
  • Some groups would resist using Bugzilla with the email reminders being the main reason. Turning off or reminding them of features where we can 'control' email notification helped a lot.
Read full review
SmartBear
  • Saves hundreds of man-hours with either QA testing or data entry
  • With the small cost of the product, it has saved the company money with both employee costs as well as the cost of mistakes made by human error or software bugs
Read full review
ScreenShots