We performed a comparison between Selenium HQ and Zeenyx AscentialTest 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."Has a good Workday application that enables us to handle some of the custom controls."
"All the features in Selenium to automate the UI."
"For me, the most valuable feature of Selenium lies in its ability to help us find elements quickly. Apart from that, the driver interface is really useful, too. When we implement the Selenium driver interface, we can easily navigate through all of the pages and sections of an app, including performing things like clicking, putting through SendKeys, scrolling down, tagging, and all the other actions we need to test for in an application."
"The plugins, the components, and the method of the library with Selenium is very user defined."
"Selenium WebDriver and Selenium IDE are useful."
"It's not too complicated to implement."
"The most valuable features of Selenium HQ are it is open source and has multiple languages and browser support. It's very useful."
"Selenium HQ's most valuable feature is its online community support, which is comprehensive and easy to access."
"The most valuable feature of AscentialTest for us is that it fully supports PowerBuilder."
"AscentialTest's object recognition in snapshots is a robust feature that goes beyond standard elements, even accurately identifying objects within Datawindows."
"If you use the PowerBuilder application, do choose AscentialTest without thinking twice."
"It’s been really easy to automate the same application TestComplete struggled with. I have been able to automate two of our key applications in just a few months. I haven’t even taken their training."
"You need to have experience in order to do the initial setup."
"Selenium HQ doesn't have any self-healing capabilities."
"There should be standardized frameworks to build automation."
"I don't have that much experience with it, but I know that Selenium is more used for websites. It is not for testing desktop applications, which is a downside of it. It can support desktop applications more."
"There is no good tool to find the Xpath. They should provide a good tool to find Xpath for dynamic elements and integrate API (REST/ SOAP) testing support."
"The initial setup of Selenium HQ is difficult in many areas, such as the framework."
"We use X path for our selectors, and sometimes, it is difficult to create locators for elements. It is very time-consuming because they're embedded deeply. A lot of that comes from the way that you architect your page. If devs are putting the IDs on their elements, it is great, and it allows you to get those elements super fast, but that's not necessarily the case. So, Selenium should be able to get your elements a lot quicker. Currently, it is time-consuming to get your selectors, locate your locators, and get to the elements."
"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."
"I would like to see an improvement in the User Interface."
"The only thing I can't wait for is for Zeenyx to add automating Mobile apps."
"Classes are not as object-oriented as I would like, but I am a programmer and not QA so I expect a lot."
"Streamlining the retrieval of results from individual test set runs would be beneficial."
Selenium HQ is ranked 5th in Functional Testing Tools with 102 reviews while Zeenyx AscentialTest is ranked 19th in Functional Testing Tools with 13 reviews. Selenium HQ is rated 8.0, while Zeenyx AscentialTest is rated 9.4. 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 Zeenyx AscentialTest writes "Robust automation with reusable steps and seamless integration". Selenium HQ is most compared with Eggplant Test, Tricentis Tosca, Worksoft Certify, Telerik Test Studio and OpenText Silk Test, whereas Zeenyx AscentialTest is most compared with Tricentis Tosca and SmartBear TestComplete. See our Selenium HQ vs. Zeenyx AscentialTest 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.