Ghost Inspector vs. BitBar

1. It's amazing for all kinds of browser testing. 2. Very easy to use and you can implement it to cover your tests in a short time. 3. You don't need to be a coding guru, many stuff are autogenerated or builtin and can be easily implemented without huge efforts 4. Reporting and UI is easy to understand and navigate through

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

• UI Integration tests
• Asynchronas execution of suites and tests
• Easy way to generate steps of the tests with Chrome plugin

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

• The number of available integrations is small, but I see more integrations are coming on the way
• Provide builtin alerting system in case of test failures
• Improve provide more roles not only user and administrator. A viewer role for example

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

1. Faster in terms of time when building the integration browser tests 2. No or minimum development skills needed. 3. No server management is needed on our end. 4. Covers a lot of browsers and cases 5. Builtin integrations for different stuff like slack and PD 6. Fast and provides asynchronous executions

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

• We saved a lot of money by using this tool instead of purchasing expensive ones
• The implementation of integrations test was supposed to take 6 months of development. With GI it took 2 months only
• Training QA to build integration tests using GI is much less that any other tool that might need development skills

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.