Espresso vs. Zeplin

• It is very easy to verify Images with drawable resources
• Color Verification we can do this by referring to the same hex code as the developer team used so that it is reused.
• Opening a desired activity without performing End-to-end flow which eventually saves time.
• If the application is built on Android we can go testing activity with Espresso as it provides all the necessary APIs
• Espresso is not appropriate to iOS app automation, from a business point of view we need to hire new resources for iOS testing.

Incentivized

I still have some issues, especially with color integration between the style guide and also project. When we update the colors, it's not automatically sync to every project. Aside from that, zeplin solves my problem for hand-off design from design to developer. I set zeplin is source of truth design file

Incentivized

• Automatic Waiting logic before failing any test
• Black box and Grey box testing
• Easy to Understand and Very Flexible
• Supported Java And Kotlin
• Fewer Efforts compare to other Mobile Automation Frameworks
• Execution is very Fast

Incentivized

• Ease in automatically building design style guides, saving time that might be spent on building style guides in another tool (such as InDesign).
• Users can use Mac, PC, or web versions of this app to collaborate on a single project, enabling us to work with a wider pool of contractors.
• Accelerates the design-to-development workflow, as it’s very easy to import Sketch or Photoshop files through plug-ins, and HTML/CSS codes are automatically created based on designs.
• Provides cross-platform specifications for web, iOS, and Android, which can save developers time in figuring out specifications beyond the “main platform" on their own.

Incentivized

• As Espresso works on the ideal thread if the threads are not handled properly by the developing team it can lead to challenges in the execution of your tests.
• Depends more on the developer's code
• we cannot develop tests as individual frameworks, we share the repository with developers.
• We need to be cautious while making changes in the tests, as we share same repository

Incentivized

• The uploading and syncing of assets is great for sketch and photoshop but we use illustrator and that can be cumbersome/tedious at times.
• There are certain elements that have been a bit confusing to navigate at times, but for the most part, it's pretty user-friendly
• More integrations

Incentivized

Great tool

Incentivized

Zeplin's component management and style guide help us to be consistent across whole product and it so easy to use for non-technical person. It is now easy to collaboration for designes between different teams like stackholders, product owner, UI/UX, developers and testers. Now there is only one point of reference is Zeplin so it is so easy to get details without asking designer or developer again and again.

Incentivized

Zeplin has classic support with a chat from the website. It's working fine, and we're also getting the support needed when needed. However, Zeplin is very good at closing the incidents and moving on. It was a while ago we had a case with their support so that it might have improved since then.

Incentivized

As our app is complete on Android Espresso is the best choice over Appium Fewer efforts in Espresso over Appium, as Espresso provides some built-in library to perform the operation. Easy to use, Espresso is very easy to understand and we can perform operations with very little code. Developers can contribute, as they have good command over Java and Kotin languages and also use Espresso for unit testing.

Incentivized

Zeplin is great to inspect and share user interfaces, specifications and assets, perfect for developers. Tools like InVision and Marvel are much better to create prototypes for both developers, coworkers and even stakeholders, but they don't have this kind of feature (inspection) as Zeplin does. So each of them can be used for different purposes, offering different approaches to share and interact with layouts for apps and websites.

Incentivized

• As it is an Open Source tool it cost-effective
• East to use, so that you can train many new Joiners to start delivering the tasks
• Maintainance is very low, as we depend on the developer's layout files we can reuse their elements
• We can cover most of the scenarios which helps in the coverage of the tests

Incentivized

• Development time has reduced as the design updates are communicated in real time to developers and they don't have to write the boilerplate code as it's already generated.
• Employee engagement has improved as every stakeholder is aware about the design changes from the beginning and can give their inputs.
• Designers save a lot of time as they don't to explicitly communicate when the update or publish their designs and also it just takes a couple of clicks to publish their designs. Also, lot of rework is saved as every stakeholder is involved right from the beginning.

Incentivized