Droplr is a tool for capturing and sharing screen images.
N/A
UserTesting
Score 8.3 out of 10
N/A
UserTesting helps UX researchers, designers, product teams, and marketers gather actionable insights through research, testing, and feedback. With a network of real people ready to share their perspectives, UserTesting enables organizations to make customer-first decisions at scale.
There are pros and cons to each and every one of them. To be honest, I use them all for different scenarios. SnagIt is a desktop app and is a bit more heavy-duty. I don't necessarily need that all the time. CloudApp is the most comparable - it is also good in its own way.
Dropbox as a screen capture function, but is much more limited compared to Droplr. The process also tends to be slower than using Droplr. Evernote allows to take and share screen captures. It provides a nice array of tools, perhaps even better than Droplr, but it is slower and …
Lightshot Screenshot provides the same screenshot functionality as Droplr, but with no cost. Lightshot Screenshot also allows you to edit a photo and can upload your photo either to the cloud or just paste it in an email/Slack/anything else to your client. There are very little …
Before Droplr, I have used TechSmith's Jing, Monosnap, Clipular, and Quickcast. I found Droplr to be the easiest to use and the most stable. If ever I do have an issue with it, their Support Team is very responsive and it's usually resolved within a day.
I used Dropbox before. I searched for alternatives, and switched to Droplr, after I had to receive over 160 submissions for a project from all over the world. The majority of the submissions were not click & download, but required additional logins, sometimes individual …
Droplr seemed to have a better mobile component for managing and sharing Drops. I don't need many mobile screen grabs but when I do sharing them through Droplr was very easy.
Droplr has a much better storing mechanism than cloud. It's also much more reliable (in our experience) and the ability to use a custom URL for link sharing is very helpful for our business. I also prefer how the Mac app works with Droplr as it feels just a bit easier to use …
While these services are great in their own right, they are general cloud services. Droplr has the expressed focus of file sharing, especially with images and videos. This makes it far more ideal for people who want to quickly and easily collaborate and express ideas in a …
Over the years, I have used many screenshot software. The list includes Skitch, Screencast-O-Matic, and native Apple screenshot functionality. None of these have been as easy to use and as dependable as Droplr. Some of the other services require manual uploading, lack specific …
I really like how Droplr auto-uploads and copies the shortened link in a snap. CloudApp does that as well, but, Droplr seems snappier. Something Droplr is lacking is something that Snagit does very well. It lets you choose where to upload or send the file when you're done. For …
I have not evaluated any other platforms. Since 2013 or so, I've been a dedicated user of the UserTesting platform, so unfortunately I can't speak on any other platforms... I don't have experience using any of the competitors.
We evaluated a range of research tools within the UX team, including UserZoom, Lookback, Maze, Optimal Workshop, and UserTesting, and, in the end, concluded that UserTesting had the most comprehensive offer in the market. The only issue we found was that UserTesting appeared …
UserTesting is probably the most polished with the largest tester pool, fastest turnaround, and great tools for both moderated and unmoderated tests. Userlytics is a solid alternative, especially for the budget-conscious. It supports usability testing on lots of devices, and …
We use both UserTesting and Userlytics in conjunction with each other. Userlytics we find to be stronger with 1-2-1 moderated study set up due to it being really simple and intuitive for both the researcher and the participant to use. Userlytics also utilises AI analysis of …
UserTesting is very much a usability testing tool. dscout has much more robust functionality and feels like a more complete user research tool, and I prefer the quality of the panel. However, the UserTesting panel is much larger, and works well when you have lower barriers to …
UserTesting is far more advanced than Userbob. It allows a lot more flexibility in the type of testing we run and specifically how we gather respondents to this.
Most tests are unmoderated, similar to Maze, which I would suggest is the most comparable in platform. I find …
UserTesting is not a one-size-fits-all approach, but it excels in certain areas. Its user-friendly UI and speedy test launch make it excellent for companies that require immediate user feedback. Budget-conscious firms may find UserTesting's cost-effectiveness appealing, …
They all have different needs but we used the others to try and do what we wanted before we switched to UserTesting. we wanted to utilize as much of our audience as possible before but we noticed that people who had familiarity with our products would breeze through the testing.
The quality of the participants: they usually have good feedback and act like "professional" users. Which is good when we want a few insights in a short amount of time. Also, the interface is good. I miss having more features, like a good transcription tool like we have in …
As we have a bigger UX team, it helps us make user research a team sport. It helps us scale and speed up learning without creating bottlenecks which might happen if we were to use smaller tools and platforms.
In terms of overall cost and value, UserTesting stacks up well. While the platform's overall usability could be improved, and it lacks certain features that other platforms offer, we could not find a better platform for quick, reliable insights in a recent comparison.
I've used dscout, and although I prefer UserTesting.com, I will say that dscout really excels at the diary study format. It would be great if UserTesting had a tool/tools that facilitated diary studies better.
Droplr is most appropriate when taking quick screenshots and sharing them internally. It's outrageously easy to take a Droplr link, paste it in Slack, and have the screenshot unfurl.
Droplr is least suited to sharing assets between you and a client. If you're sharing a screenshot, you have to paste the link, then copy the image that's featured within the link to share the asset. You can't guarantee that a client would actually click on a deliverable link, so it takes up time and storage space.
UserTesting has been great for moderated customer interviews/usability testing as well as for unmoderated testing of messaging, imagery, prototypes and live experiences. I would say that the scope of what you want needs to be limited, as the participants are only paid so much and tests are supposed to not exceed a certain amount of time. For customer interviews, I think it can be difficult to onboard customers to UserTesting if they have never used it before. If I set up interviews, I don't even have them use the UserTesting scheduling tool, I actually set up all the interviews with the customers myself through the tool (being mindful of time zones!). When we run the meeting, they really don't even know UserTesting is involved. Might be nice for UserTesting to allow the upload/connecting to of a Zoom interview and let it do the transcription/analysis from there.
Making screenshots and recordings couldn't be simpler. I use these features constantly and it helps me to improve the user experience prior to user testing and delivery. The users can actually see how these functions will work and can replay/review them easily.
The process of sharing files is simple and the desktop app, as well as browser extensions, make it a real pleasure to use.
The tagging and categorization of boards, as well as the ability to share these collections with others, is invaluable. This allows me to easily share, for example, a large number of concepts at once so I do not have to send multiple links to customers and collaborators.
The windows app is not very reliable, it has some bugs still that are being worked out.
The screen selection for video would be better if you didn't have to share the entire screen or window. It would be nice if you could record only a selected area like with a screenshot.
When taking a screenshot with the chrome extension it would be nice if it were more clear what area your mouse was in right after clicking. For instance, highlight the cross-hair and dim the rest of the screen. The screen would lighten only in the area you select.
Quality of participant pool - many are career testers, and many are untruthful. Since sessions are auto-scheduled if the screener is past, you often don't know until they've completed the test. Allow double screening or be more stringent in removing users from the platform.
Unfinished products - focus on making one product the best it can be before moving on to a new one. Unmoderated testing is still missing features (randomization of 3 or more prototypes, etc.)
I'm actually trying to get a license for my current job at my current company (recently moved to a new company). I gave it this rating because I am about to go to our executive to ask that we purchase it! I know that there will be value because we are forecasting a high volume of research next year
It can be difficult to organize our tests and go back and find information. I think the AI tools are helping and will help with this, but for now it is time consuming to sort through all of the tests and information and then synthesize it and share it with others. It just takes a lot of time.
I have contacted UserTesting's customer service online, by email, or by phone a few times, and each time, I have encountered the same professionalism and expertise. Even in person during a work event, they were there, and it was the same experience.
From a technical perspective, the implementation was extremely smooth. Most of the change management / implementation hurdles were clearing use of the tool through our various security, legal, and information privacy teams. Once these concerns were addressed (UserTesting.com was very helpful in providing all the needed documentation), the implementation process was very simple and we were able to get going right away.
There are pros and cons to each and every one of them. To be honest, I use them all for different scenarios. Snagit is a desktop app and is a bit more heavy-duty. I don't necessarily need that all the time. CloudApp is the most comparable - it is also good in its own way
We evaluated a range of research tools within the UX team, including UserZoom, Lookback, Maze, Optimal Workshop, and UserTesting, and, in the end, concluded that UserTesting had the most comprehensive offer in the market. The only issue we found was that UserTesting appeared to be prohibitively expensive at first glance. In the end, however, the deal struck to get UserTesting for the UX team proved to be sufficiently competitive for us to proceed.
I use Droplr every day and it's been a huge boost for productivity since I never need to think about how a screenshot will be shared. It's just built in and so easy.