We performed a comparison between LambdaTest and Selenium HQ based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Functional Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Stability-wise, I have not experienced any downtime or other performance issues."
"It's user-friendly and offers valuable features for testing, making it a reliable tool."
"LambdaTest is easy to use, and the documentation provides all the needed information."
"The solution is very easy to understand and has a user-friendly UI."
"Geolocation testing is as straightforward as ticking checkboxes of browsers, operating systems, and countries."
"In case something goes wrong at LambdaTest end, the Support team is extremely responsive to analyze any platform-related issues."
"The UI is pretty clean and easy to navigate, and we were able to figure it out very quickly."
"LambdaTest offers geolocation testing in automation, which is amazing!"
"Due to its popularity, you can find pretty much any answer in open discussions from the community."
"It supports most of the mainstream browsers such as Chrome, Firefox, IE and etc."
"Selenium HQ's most valuable feature is its online community support, which is comprehensive and easy to access."
"Data parametrization and parallelization are the most important features in any automation tool."
"It is a good automation tool."
"The ability to present your tests on a wiki page and hooking them up to the scripts/fixtures."
"It's easy for new people to get trained on this solution. If we are hiring new people, the resource pool in the market in test automation is largely around Selenium."
"It supports multiple processes, which is great."
"Improvements on a platform need to happen on a timely basis...There should be some new features coming up or some performance improvisation over a period of time."
"Mobile application testing would be helpful for us."
"Load flow compared to other stacks needs improvement."
"LambdaTest needs to have native application testing, which would be a great help to my team."
"If possible to simulate the finger pinch, it would make it more realistic."
"I think Lambdatest is a valuable tool for our team and things that have room for improvement would be mobile app testing, as it can be an important addition to the tool."
"Responsive testing UI is a bit cluttered, whereas the LT browser is much better to use."
"I feel that the automated screenshot testing takes a little longer on MacOS sometimes."
"In the beginning, we had issues with several test cases failing during regression. Over a period of time, we built our own framework around Selenium which helped us overcome of these issues."
"They should leverage the tools for supporting Windows apps."
"I would like to see some reporting or test management tools."
"It would be very helpful to be able to write scripts in a GUI, rather than depend so heavily on the command line."
"It is not a licensed tool. The problem with that is that it won't be able to support Windows desktop applications. There is no support for Windows desktop applications. They can do something about it. Its user interface can also be improved, which is not great compared to the other latest tools. Anybody who has been working on functional testing or manual testing cannot directly work on Selenium HQ without learning programming skills, which is a disadvantage."
"For email-based applications, we can't automate as we would like to, making it necessary to bring in a third-party product to do so."
"If they can integrate more recording features, like UFT, it would be helpful for automation, but it's not necessary. They can also add a few more reporting features for advanced reporting."
"We can only use Selenium HQ for desktop applications which would be helpful. We are only able to do online based applications."
LambdaTest is ranked 14th in Functional Testing Tools with 22 reviews while Selenium HQ is ranked 5th in Functional Testing Tools with 103 reviews. LambdaTest is rated 8.8, while Selenium HQ is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of LambdaTest writes "Technical support should be improved, though it has great documentation". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Selenium HQ writes "Easy to use with great pricing and lots of documentation". LambdaTest is most compared with BrowserStack, Sauce Labs, Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio and Perfecto, whereas Selenium HQ is most compared with Eggplant Test, Tricentis Tosca, Worksoft Certify, Telerik Test Studio and Automation Anywhere (AA). See our LambdaTest vs. Selenium HQ report.
See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Functional 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.