BrowserStack vs. TestComplete

I didn't have problems working with BrowserStack. The tool is stable, there are a lot of different devices and OS. It's really useful. I only had a problem in the past while working with a company that had geolocation activated on the app. The app only works in the USA, and I was in Brazil. I faced many many issues working on this circumstances. I tried to get in touch with BrowserStack, but I leave the company before get the problem solved. But that one was the only big problem that I've faced while using BrowserStack.

Incentivized

Best suited to smaller unit test or tests broken up, couple of forms at a time Not suited - larger regressions test involving multiple systems. - my main regression involving payments has been unsuccessful for the last 3 years despite all working fine separately and while being watched

• BrowserStack App Automate dashboard gives us video, screenshots and logs of what exactly happened during the test run. This helps us easily analyse failures in our automation test and figure out the root cause for failures.
• BrowserStack App Live provides us with lot of devices to test on. This is specifically useful in case of high end iPhone devices which are costly for us to procure in house.
• BrowserStack App Automate provides parallel threads which can be shared across multiple teams. This has helped us scale our mobile test automation effort across the organisation.
• In house mobile lab might be cost effective initially but when it comes to maintaining it and add new devices as and when it comes in market makes it less cost effective than cloud solution like BrowserStack

Incentivized

• Identifying UI objects and application structure
• Expandability of tests through scripts and script extensions/plugins
• low barrier of entry (you can get started quickly, and other's don't need much explanation to contribute on a basic level)
• Possibility of Jira integration for reporting
• Relatively few (and usually easy to solve) git conflicts when working simultaneously
• easy handling of test data, also for iterative tests

Incentivized

• Overall performance of usability of the device
• Overheating conditions could be a useful feature to be included
• Downloading the app to the Home screen for quick selection would be helpful
• Screen orientation feature
• Tablets for additional devices to be tested against
• Add in a feature to test against wearables

Incentivized

• TestComplete could stand to have a simplified view for different types of users. For instance, as a manager/architecture guy, I'm not so interested in getting into the code and am more interested in file-based interactions.
• TestComplete could use more integration with reporting for things like TeamCity to improve test status visibility.

Incentivized

This decisions mostly taken by senior management at VP and CEO level, they also need approval from many other teams like dev, design according to the use, and finance due to competitive cost, They do check other product as well, and I am just a single person from QA team, and not a decision maker

Incentivized

We have bigger test automation pack using test complete at the same time we also think this is not good performing tool for large number of test automation scripts.

Incentivized

It integrates directly in internal networks and local development. The point and click interface of choosing your device, pick the browser/version and you have a working emulation of that exact environment. What else could you ask for? I've set our least computer savvy users up with BrowserStack for testing in minutes. It feels like it's just part of your local environemnt.

Incentivized

It is usable when you become accustomed to its quirks. Not using it for two months and then you need to re-learn the quirks for some features (but some quirks are so awful that they will never fade from your memory). So, when using it regularly, it is possible to be quite productive, if no big correction in name mapping is needed.

Incentivized

Its always available in our organisation. Just a click away from testing on the exact devices we require.

Incentivized

The tests are fast considering the fact that they're Appium tests. I've seen tests reliably pass or fail when they're supposed to, with next to zero issues on the BrowserStack side of things. Tests launch only seconds after I kick off them off from my CLI.

Incentivized

I'm saying a 10 for support for BrowserStack only based on feedback from the development team. I myself have never had to reach out to support for any questions or issues, but others in the company have. From my conversations with them, the support was fantastic and had been a pleasure working with the BrowserStack team.

Incentivized

Some bugs were quickly resolved, but most UX quirks of the tool are just marked "as designed". No follow up for enhancement request.

Incentivized

Yes, it was online training on meet, and trainer looks like skilled and technical strong, he has covered end to end all the features and he has answers all the queries. because of this trainings we are able to implement it by our own in the organization, thank you for support and training.

Incentivized

It was a quick training from the support of browserstack, it was nice and easy to understand, thanks again for the support given by the team. and regularly I used to receive mails for training from support for any new feature they launch, I was able to spread same training to all my team and dev.

Incentivized

It was new learning for me, till the time I was not aware of such tools are available for manual CBT testing and for automation integration caue I was using some VM for testing, it has increase my knowledge and skill set. It was a fun while implementation and I enjoyed it.

Incentivized

If you develop a mobile application and your testing process goes in cloud, probably you will face a problem - how to implement a stable connection between your mobile devices and testing servers

Incentivized

BrowserStack's library of devices and browsers is way bigger than Chrome DevTools. Additionally, I find that BrowserStack is more accurate than Chrome DevTools in regards to how pages render on the various devices I need to test on. Overall, BrowserStack is far better than Chrome DevTools.

Incentivized

TestComplete stacks up against them in terms of GUI and seamless performance. It records each and every step and action been performed in the application and produces a detailed report in a well-structured manner. It can connect and access seamlessly among various databases directly to speed up the testing process.

Incentivized

Not sure about all this billing details, I am not part of that discussion.

Incentivized

It provides us with the latest technology in the market, which enable us to make sure that the software we create is accessible on them.

Incentivized

Not used

Incentivized

• Saves a lot of money, by providing several devices at our disposal
• It gives you devices like, mobile phones, tabs and desktops of various Operating Systems
• Only Challenge is it might consume more time for development, but testing should be fast and easy

Incentivized

• Saves hundreds of man-hours with either QA testing or data entry
• With the small cost of the product, it has saved the company money with both employee costs as well as the cost of mistakes made by human error or software bugs

Incentivized