We performed a comparison between Selenium HQ and Visual Studio Test Professional 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."It is compatible with and supports multiple languages, such as Java and Python. It is open source, and it is widely used."
"The stability and performance are good."
"It supports most of the mainstream browsers such as Chrome, Firefox, IE and etc."
"Selenium HQ lets you create your customized functions with whatever language you want to use, like Python, Java, .NET, etc. You can integrate with Selenium and write."
"I like that it is a robust and free open source. There is a lot of community support available, and there are a lot of developers using them. There's good community support."
"The tool is easy to use and log in with respect to other tools. It is open-source. We can customize the product. I also like its security."
"The stability of the solution has been good, it is reliable we have not had any bugs."
"The most valuable feature of Selenium HQ is the ability to create automatic tests that can replicate human behavior."
"The most valuable feature has been to store all our packages in one place including SSIS packages, SQL tables, TFS and SSR."
"Visual Studio is the easiest to use."
"The interface is easy to use."
"Customization is the most powerful feature of this product."
"What I like most about Visual Studio Test Professional is the way people publish templates and publish integration."
"The most valuable features of the solution are its ease of use and availability."
"I was satisfied with the support given by customer service."
"Visual Studio Test Pro is super helpful for my Microsoft app work."
"It would be very great if Selenium would provide some framework examples so newcomers could get started more quickly."
"The latest versions are often unstable."
"Could have additional readability and abstraction."
"I would like to see Selenium HQ support legacy platforms."
"The solution does not offer up enough information in regards to personality testing."
"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."
"For now, I guess Selenium could add some other features like object communications for easy expansion."
"The stop control needs to be improved with a configuration tool to enable desktop support."
"The performance could be faster."
"The documents on the Microsoft website are not very useful, and they ought to make it easier to find answers."
"Visual Studio Test Professional needs to improve its scalability."
"The data flow can be improved."
"The solution can improve the startup time."
"The product must provide more automation."
"There are too many features with the product and I would like there to be less."
"The pricing of this solution should be lowered."
More Visual Studio Test Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →
Selenium HQ is ranked 5th in Functional Testing Tools with 103 reviews while Visual Studio Test Professional is ranked 6th in Functional Testing Tools with 48 reviews. Selenium HQ is rated 8.0, while Visual Studio Test Professional is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Selenium HQ writes "Easy to use with great pricing and lots of documentation". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Visual Studio Test Professional writes "Customization is a key feature as is the ability to integrate with third-party services ". Selenium HQ is most compared with Eggplant Test, Tricentis Tosca, Worksoft Certify, Telerik Test Studio and Automation Anywhere (AA), whereas Visual Studio Test Professional is most compared with TFS, Apache JMeter, Tricentis NeoLoad, SmartBear TestComplete and Tricentis Tosca. See our Selenium HQ vs. Visual Studio Test Professional report.
See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors and best Regression 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.