We performed a comparison between Appium and BrowserStack based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Regression Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We do not need to pay for the solution. It’s free."
"The latest versions of the solution are stable."
"Obviously because of automation, it reduces manual testing efforts."
"Appium helps me to do as much as much as I want to."
"The way Appium server interacts with mobile apps is fantastic. It provides all the information about the elements inside the app, Android as well as iOS. I can interact with the element quickly, just type some text or get some text values from the element - whether it's a drop-down, or web text, or a native element."
"We develop apps using the React Native framework, and Appium integrates well for testing those apps. The Appium automation framework also has good integration with GitHub Actions and plenty of other tools and frameworks, including BrowserStack."
"The solution is easy to use."
"Appium provides a record-and-play option, and the commands are the same as those that Selenium uses. So a person who has some exposure to Selenium will be able to write a piece of code in Appium."
"The most valuable features are the variety of tools available."
"The most valuable feature is that it provides parallel and cross-browser testing. It enables us to run tests on multiple browsers or devices simultaneously."
"It is a stable solution. There's no lagging and jittering."
"BrowserStack has lots of devices to choose from."
"We like the model device factory for iOS and Android devices."
"The most valuable feature is the variety the solution offers around the different types of devices, especially mobile devices."
"I like that it offers full device capability."
"The product's initial setup phase was not very difficult."
"The challenging part with Appium is that installation can be a bit tricky. It can be challenging to set up in Android versus iOS environments."
"I rarely use Appium nowadays because I'm now at the managerial level, but the last time I used it, whenever I selected and clicked on an element, Appium was very slow. I tried to debug it, but I still couldn't find the problem, so this is an area for improvement in the solution. Another area for improvement lies with the connector and server. For example, the effort to get into the local machine sometimes causes the emulator to become slow, which then leads to failure in testing, and this is the usual issue I've encountered from Appium. An additional feature I'd like added to Appium in its next release is being able to do automation in iOS without using XPath and the name of the element. In Xcode, you can use previous UI tests for detecting elements, but in Appium, you have to use Xpath and the element name instead of being able to directly put the X-UiPath, which is what you can do in Xcode. In iOS as well, sometimes the element doesn't have a name or a path. Sometimes, there's also no element."
"We need some bug fixes for nested elements."
"One thing which can be really helpful is that there is some kind of a recorder made available rather than scripting everything."
"Appium can improve when the case fails, there should be a feature where you can generate the report from Appium. Once you're on a test case, automatically the screenshot should be captured which would avoid manual intervention. These features would be beneficial to migrate to Appium."
"Appium has problems with automated validations following iOS updates, causing us to have to validate manually."
"Image recognition could be improved. We have some images in our mobile applications. It should be able to run from the cloud, so we can automate the catcher."
"The initial setup is straightforward if you have previous experience with the solution, but it can be complicated for a novice user."
"Customer support could be better. We tried to implement and explore this product with the vendor or reseller's help, but we haven't had any good response about the product."
"The solution is slow."
"We had some execution issues."
"Sometimes BrowserStack is really slow and devices are not loading. it is really annoying and that's why we bought several newer devices because sometimes it's affecting us a lot."
"I would like for there to be more integration with BrowserStack and other platforms."
"Occasionally, there are disruptions in the connection which can interfere with our testing processes, especially when testing on phones."
"There is some stability issue in the product, making it in areas where improvements are required."
"There is room for improvement in pricing."
Appium is ranked 5th in Regression Testing Tools with 25 reviews while BrowserStack is ranked 4th in Functional Testing Tools with 25 reviews. Appium is rated 8.0, while BrowserStack is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Appium writes "It's easy to launch applications". On the other hand, the top reviewer of BrowserStack writes "Good in the area of automation and offers a high test coverage to users". Appium is most compared with Katalon Studio, Tricentis Tosca, Perfecto, Xamarin Platform and OpenText UFT One, whereas BrowserStack is most compared with LambdaTest, Sauce Labs, Perfecto, Tricentis Tosca and Selenium HQ. See our Appium vs. BrowserStack report.
See our list of best Regression Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Regression Testing Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.