January 15, 2016
Score 9 out of 10
Overall Satisfaction with Crittercism
Crittercism has helped our teams find crashes that normally aren't visible to us. It allowed us to find issues that customers were experiencing, therefore allowing us to escalate the problems to the right hands to better serve our loyal customers. I would definitely recommend that any company in software use Crittercism to help them diagnose issues.
- Identifying crashes users are experiencing.
- Allowing us to see how many times the crash occurred.
- Allowing us to see what times the crashes have occurred.
- Crittercism is an hour behind. I recommend that it displays the crashes sooner so we can accurately escalate it sooner.
- It helped improve our rating in the app store as we were catching more issues that users were experiencing after testing cycles were complete.
- It helped employees get a better understanding of what they should be looking for during testing cycles.
- It helped employees better diagnose and escalate issues to the software engineers.
A similar product we use is Conviva. I personally prefer Crittercism as Conviva seems to miss things fairly often. Critter tends to catch most issues as long as development has set the app up for it. I've had to reproduce issues several times before Conviva catches it whereas Crittercism will catch it on the first try.
Crittercism is definitely, in my opinion, best for software testers/engineers. We are the faces behind proper app behavior. However, I'm sure there are other scenarios that would benefit from this program. Engineers should should use it prior to sending out builds to see if anything major is crashing or going wrong behind the scenes to diagnose the problem before going into testing/production.