HeadSpin vs. Testsigma

We have been using HeadSpin for our web and mobile application testing. It is an easy-to-use solution that provides detailed and in-depth analytics from the testing results. We also get a wide range of live networks and devices to perform the testing from HeadSpin. It has an inbuilt artificial intelligence engine that helps us to get real-time scenarios simulated, which is very helpful for finding performance issues and improving the overall quality of the applications.

It's well suited for straightforward test cases that can run in batch in a short period of time. It's less appropriate for more complex cases that require visual or ID changes, simply because if you run a test case, it won't always see the same IDs and objects that you recorded. It's great for running batch cases on general functionality.

• Keep track of each browser we have tested and when we lastly updated them.
• Remove any deprecated code or plugins that may cause issues with other browsers.
• Add browser information to our site’s meta tags so that the site displays correctly in different browsers.
• Test our website on all browsers to ensure compatibility.

• Helps record and redo test cases without needing your own machine to run or record them.
• Is consistent with how it approaches test cases.
• Provides full recordings of test cases and error reports.

• UI needs to be improved
• Graphs on the dashboard are a bit laggy and need detailing for a better understanding of the user

Incentivized

Independently Invited by TrustRadius

A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info

• AI Implementation sometimes throws test cases off the mark.
• Object and ID detection are not consistent (Recorder will detect, the test run will not).

It's not perfected yet; the app's detection and replication aren't 100% reliable, but they're reliable enough to run hundreds of cases a week. The cost-to-benefit ratio feels off and would deter companies from staying. Their staff is very communicative and eager to improve, which brings it back up.

Though LambdaTest was cheaper, it did not offer the deal devices and we wanted to be 100% sure that our app offers a perfect experience to all users. Simulators and emulators are not the technology we wanted to rely on.

The major benefit over the others so far is the ability to run test cases with other devices and have them run in the background as a separate machine. However, the app's cost works against this feature.

• Simplified the approach to test the mobile application on multiple devices from different vendors. This helped us to ensure the stability of the application in different environments.
• In-depth analysis to understand the loopholes in the application design function. This helped us to improve the application design and overall user experience.

Incentivized

Independently Invited by TrustRadius

A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info

• Has saved hundreds of manual hours of test case runs.
• Has helped identify various issues previously unknown.