CodeStream vs. Sauce Labs

CodeStream is well suited for all developments where two or more people are developing something and I feel there's rarely any project which is been developed and maintained by a single developer. So in short codestream is suitable for almost every development team: - More than one person is developing the code. - People need to get frequent reviews for efficient development. - Best suitable for the teams where new people are there very often. - Collaborations are part of every day to day activities. - Without raising PR and branch management reviews are been incorporated.

Having used some of the competitor's tools over the year I would say that SauceLabs provides a lot of value for money if you plan to run long sets of tests with high frequencies. Paying for a single slot means you can run tests whenever you want without creeping costs but it does make running tests in parallel require an extra slot. Currently, our test suite takes over three hours to run and at the moment it is cost prohibitive to purchase an extra slot. However, having access to live testing and integration with Appium is great.

Incentivized

• Integration
• Easy to use.
• Easy to maintain.

Incentivized

• Provides a comprehensive selection of browser and platform versions for test automation and CI/CD pipeline support
• Provides a rich selection of browser/platform availability for customer issue reproduction
• Provides a comprehensive set of virtual mobile device configurations for automation and availability
• Sauce Labs' SaaS and self service tools work and perform well

Incentivized

• UI and navigation between services
• Only support YAML method
• Manual setting of triggers in the pipeline

Incentivized

• I've had four changes in account managers over the past couple of years. They ranged from super experienced/advocate to some that seems relatively junior/a bit removed. I understand this happens but clarity on what I can expect with these partnerships would be valuable. What I've gotten in the end has varied dramatically.

Incentivized

As we currently know, there's nothing on the market with a big feature set like saucelabs at their current price point. Along with the business not having to learn a whole new tool to use again and the ability to refresh our private devices and the continuously growing number of public devices available and features.

Incentivized

It is an incredibly easy service to use for what its primary intention is. The only reason a point is deducted is because more feature enrichment can be done around the Sauce Connect Proxy utility and the Jenkins Sauce OnDemand plugin. User Account administration also needs more work, such as the addition of user groups, rather than a simple hierarchy of users.

Incentivized

Yes, Sauce labs is always there, and it is easy to troubleshoot when you are having any connectivity issue, they always keep you informed when they plan to perform any type of maintenance window on their side in advance, so you can plan and will not affect your current work. I do not recall any outage.

Incentivized

The time where they acquired TestObject and were trying to integrate their services would probably be the most annoying time. Annoying as features were in two separate places (websites) for example. But since the introduction of their unified platform, we haven't run into any issues as of yet and we've used them for at least 5-6 years now.

Incentivized

The people here are just so friendly and personable. For instance, Tristan Lombard answered every single email with a very cheery tone and not only did he diagnose my issue, he also made sure to ask how my day was going. Keep it up

Incentivized

I am not sure if it's my company that makes getting Sauce Labs integrated into the team difficult or is it Sauce Labs. The process for getting Sauce Labs for a project is quite a tedious process and the information for using Sauce Labs initially is quite lacking. There is little support for getting started

When compared to Bitbucket, CodeStream is a luck lustre. Even though the overall features are more with CodeStream like customisation of API and more control of triggers across the designed pipeline, Bitbucket and Visual Studio score better in terms of faster implementation and dedicated and proven support system . Apart from that CodeStream fairs better than AWS CodePipeline in overall features

Incentivized

We have also tested out Browser Stack, which at the time was more geared towards manual testing. Although it appeared to support more mobile devices/browsers, we also wanted something that can plugin in easily with our existing Selenium test scripts. Sauce Labs was definitely more geared towards our goals at the moment which were to automation functional/regression testing and build it into our release pipeline.

Incentivized

With private devices, you have full reign over usage of them, so no complaints there. Public devices are available if no one else is using it, which is understandable. Browser VMs are based on number of open sessions and Saucelabs give you a certain number depending on what you need. If you need more, then you pay for more. It is as simple as that. You need more devices, then you can pay for more private ones too. A workaround for public devices is to pick the first available one and not be too picky, that's if you are able to of course.

Incentivized

• Productivity of the team increased.
• Lowered the chances of mistakes at the time of review.
• No corners left un-observed.
• The development cycle becomes more interactive and hence team enjoys the peer discussions and review process.
• A lot of time is been saved, no need of conventional time taking reviews procedures.

• Eh... Negligible? Being on AWS West makes it quite a few hops for us, so the process times out every now and again. That is frustrating.
• I can't really speak to the dollars, as I am not privy to the information.

Incentivized