Perfecto by Perforce vs. WAVE Web Accessibility Evaluation Tool

Same test case scripts can be executed on different mobiles irrespective of operating systems and language it supports. This covers a wide range of devices (Android, iOS, Blackberry etc) on which automated testing can be performed in very less time. The test scripts are written written using keyword-based Script Once Technology. The creation of scripts are easy. It saves time and effort. Repetitive testing on each iteration would be now be less tedious. This would also allow QA to focus on quality. It would expand test case coverage in the application and finally release reliable/robust application. In all, improving the app quality.

Incentivized

This is pretty middle of the road. It does a good job of picking out some of the low-hanging fruit, but it's not going properly evaluate semantic structure and will pop several false positives. Additionally, the tools are incomplete. For instance, the contrast editor will allow you to test your colors with sliders so you can get the closest color that passes; however, that isn't how color palettes work, you generally don't get to change a companies palette without a lot of pain; furthermore, there is no ability to adjust the font-size and both font-size AND color are used to determine contrast requirements. Oh, and they use points VS pixels...nobody is using points on the web even if the ADA uses them in their fairly dated guidelines. Text from the actual contrast editor "Text is present that has a contrast ratio less than 4.5:1, or large text (larger than 18 point or 14 point bold) has a contrast ratio less than 3:1.". 14pt = 18.66 pixels, so I can see their logic even if I don't agree with it

• Impressive UI
• Strong support system
• Wide variety of devices

Incentivized

• Provides report of errors for you
• Explains what needs to be fixed so you know why
• Shows the errors next to each item on your website so you can see which one they mean

Incentivized

• It has a lot of room for improvements in terms of reporting and integration with other reporting and defect tools.
• It should have the capability of capturing charts data.
• It should be able to do some scenarios that only manual testers can do. Like - use of camera and touch ID features.

Incentivized

• Sometimes the automated functions miss things or are mis-triggered
• I would like it to link out to more in-depth reading on issues and resolving them
• I would love it if it generated a PDF report to send people.

Incentivized

Perfecto has a wide array of mobile devices we can chose from. Automation is easier using OCR technology. The test script generated detailed report of the executed test script at the end with vast variety of information such as actual results, screen captures in digital format, continuous video recording of the entire script and graphs showing statistics about the execution

Incentivized

For this, I'm speaking specifically to the Siteimprove browser plugin. The Siteimprove plugin: Allows to filter on guideline level Catches a few more errors than WAVE Web Accessibility Evaluation Tool, but comes pretty close But, both do a great job in all other aspects WebAIM shines in its simplicity of overlaying of errors and warnings on the page. I think its real benefit is a lower learning curve on understanding how to use the tool

Incentivized

• Since the devices are over cloud, it saves a lot of investment on mobile testing.
• Can be used by testers across the globe.

Incentivized

• It has led us to be more inclusive and accessible in our website
• We have more website visitors
• We have had positive comments about our website in terms of being accessible

Incentivized