TestComplete vs. Tuskr

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

Tuskr works well for teams that want a straightforward test management solution without a steep learning curve. It's especially useful for Agile projects where frequent testing and collaboration are important. Teams looking for extensive enterprise-level customization or highly advanced reporting may find some limitations, but for day-to-day QA management, it performs very well.

• TestComplete is great for working with our non-web applications.
• TestComplete allows us to interface with our web application in a robust way.
• Despite the age of our architecture, TestComplete handles the old stuff that's been around a while as well as the newer technology when we are able to implement it.

Incentivized

• Its easy to import test cases in Tuskr by using the csv import feature
• Test runs are easy to create and can include test cases from multiple suits.
• Reports of test runs make it easier to track all the cases that were covered at a particular instance before giving a release signoff.

Incentivized

• Would love to see TC be a plugin for Visual Studio. Instead of VBScript or JavaScript, to use C# or VB.NET
• Easier to set up with iOS. Android is not bad but iOS seems slow and confusing to get up and running
• Built-in PDF reading support, built in Excel API

Incentivized

• When you click into a specific test, the status automatically clears. it would be nice for this to be preserved when clicking in instead of clearing
• It would be nice to be able to add comments specific to certain steps in each test, instead of just one big comment box
• Since we use Tuskr for QA, we structure it as a table with instructions and expected results. because these are side by side, sometimes it is hard to go in a step-by-step order when there are multiple QA steps to take to complete the test.

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

Tuskr suits our organization needs

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

The Tuskr App, overall rating depends on its easeiest way to use as their features and managment tool are too good. If you need a easier tool and cost-effective tool and a lot of feature in it. and its return of investment is very good. And the software is really ease to adapt

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

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

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

I have not worked with related testing suite before but Tuskr has been the favorite platform for running test suites. It has generated positive leads from the company data by offering the necessary testing support. It is easy to integrate with other applications to suit business demands. The system generate results from various testing suites that can shared with our clients.

• Improved product quality overall, since automating tedious tests frees up time and is not prone to fatigue
• When getting started - depending on the complexity of the software/UI tested - it can be a time sink before it brings actual value, and changes to the structure of the UI need to be communicated early, so the changes can be implemented on time to run the automation
• Once set up, the maintenance cost is low, and the automation frees up a lot of resources especially in an agile environment where there are a lot of releases that would need regression tests.

Incentivized

• Everyone in the team can go and read how to perform a specific test and note down the result of it which can be viewed by anyone
• We can filter based on results understanding what test cases are failing from previous runs
• Helps save a lot of time, effort and minimises future issues

Incentivized