Micro Focus Business Process Testing (discontinued) vs. BitBar

You may want to consider this solution if you are already using HP ALM and HP UFT. It's a nice add on and encourages the team to think more on building small component based tests and promote lot of reuse. Also, if your team want business analysts or any non technical people build tests based on the flows, its probably the best solution available now. On the down side, the execution times if you have too many components are not great and on top of that you have to pay extra for the licensing. You can also build such frameworks using more open source solutions like bdd solutions.

Incentivized

CrossBrowserTesting is a great tool to use when you have a new page or new content that you want to test on an array of devices/browsers. In the diverse online world nowadays, it is nearly impossible to ensure optimization for every case. CBT allows you to get closer to that goal.

Incentivized

• Biggest advantage is - you can use the same components created for manual as well as automated testing
• It has a nice little feature called extended capabilities where you can easily automate tests SAP and oracle type architectures.
• Easy access library lets you create highly reusable and shareable components and the integrations is not that difficult

Incentivized

• Allows me to test on our development server with ease which is behind a firewall.
• Using automation for my tests.
• Screenshots of the problems on each page.
• Ability to jump between screen sizes quickly.

Incentivized

• If you are using components for automation testing, the time it takes to load a new component is too high and it sucks off the benefit of component based testing.
• You want to have many components in a test and so a BA can also create automated tests easily but too many components takes too long to executed .
• It comes with a cost. You can simply build a modular framework even without this framework and probably more efficiently.

Incentivized

• Test case support is somewhat limited in customization ability.
• Not a unique problem to them (or their 'fault'), but content behind VPN or intranet cannot be scanned.
• Pricing with tier level and features can sometimes be confusing (ie. what is and what is not included).

Incentivized

The idea for building a component based modular test framework is great and it would be great add-on to HP tools if the add-on efficiency is made high and the cost is low.

Incentivized

Selenium: 1. Selenium is Open source tool 2. Needs proper framework development and integration with multiple 3rd party tools 3. Not much secure 4. Needs scripting knowledge for people working on it 5. takes time and effort CrossBrowser Testing: 1. Licensed , so secure 2. Less time , less effort 3. Quick results 4. No scripting language knowledge needed 5. More coverage 6. Without any framework creation also we can test on multiple devices/browsers

Incentivized

• As the tool itself promotes re usability, we were able to cut down development and maintenance costs by good %.
• More than cost savings, out no technical folks started building automated tests based on user flows very easily.

Incentivized

• By using CrossBrowserTesting we are saving many hours a week in manual work hours.
• Our automated Selenium tests run in a fraction of the time it takes to manually test our components, so we can spend more time building great user experiences and less time triaging bugs.