For quick and easy browser integration test, Ghost Inspector it the best
Overall Satisfaction with Ghost Inspector
We use Ghost Inspector to run integration tests for our main flows in the system. The main problem with integration tests is that other tools will take much time and effort to implement and cover the whole system. With Ghost Inspector, it was super easy and fast.
Pros
- UI Integration tests
- Asynchronas execution of suites and tests
- Easy way to generate steps of the tests with Chrome plugin
Cons
- The number of available integrations is small, but I see more integrations are coming on the way
- Provide builtin alerting system in case of test failures
- Improve provide more roles not only user and administrator. A viewer role for example
- We saved a lot of money by using this tool instead of purchasing expensive ones
- The implementation of integrations test was supposed to take 6 months of development. With GI it took 2 months only
- Training QA to build integration tests using GI is much less that any other tool that might need development skills
1. Faster in terms of time when building the integration browser tests
2. No or minimum development skills needed.
3. No server management is needed on our end.
4. Covers a lot of browsers and cases
5. Builtin integrations for different stuff like slack and PD
6. Fast and provides asynchronous executions
2. No or minimum development skills needed.
3. No server management is needed on our end.
4. Covers a lot of browsers and cases
5. Builtin integrations for different stuff like slack and PD
6. Fast and provides asynchronous executions
Do you think Ghost Inspector delivers good value for the price?
Yes
Are you happy with Ghost Inspector's feature set?
Yes
Did Ghost Inspector live up to sales and marketing promises?
Yes
Did implementation of Ghost Inspector go as expected?
Yes
Would you buy Ghost Inspector again?
Yes

Comments
Please log in to join the conversation