We performed a comparison between CrossBrowserTesting and Tricentis Tosca 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 has increased the speed of our regression testing."
"CrossBrowserTesting allows us to test our site with real-world devices in real-world scenarios and find what we're missing."
"When I started to work on testing automation, I was very excited about how easy it is to run tests on different browsers. It was just a matter of configuration."
"The CrossBrowserTesting Selenium API and live test features have greatly improved our team's ability to quickly and effectively perform QA."
"When developing new pages that have questionable functionality or coding, we will often use CBT to test it in a browser. CBT works with our testing environment and development site."
"With screenshots, I can quickly verify a page looks universally good in minutes."
"I can run a page through the screenshot tool, then send a URL with the results to my team."
"The extensive range of products available to simulate is something I have come to appreciate as it has resulted in an ability to broaden the scope of our tests."
"Tosca BI is important to make sure that our data integrity is in check and validated; to make sure our data is good. Our data is the number-one important driver for our company, so if that's not good, we have some big problems."
"You can quickly build automated testing, manage it, and have it run on a regular basis to ensure that there are no issues."
"It is easy to maintain and easy to automate. No coding skills are required to automate. It is also easy in terms of transferring knowledge and skills. Many of my team members shifted over the past one and a half years, and there was no big issue with respect to knowledge sharing. It is a good tool that enables me to re-automate my scripts and update my scripts as quickly as possible. Looking at the amount of rework and maintenance activity that we had done for our scripts, it might have been a nightmare with some other scripting tool."
"Tricentis Tosca is well integrated with other products like Jira."
"The most important feature is its ability to support the technical automation of specific clients that we cannot use with other tools."
"To me, what stands out the most about Tricentis Tosca is that even if I'm not a technical tester, I could pick up on how to use it very quickly because of the mechanisms of the tool, for example, its scanning mechanism. I'm not so technical, but I'm able to maneuver through Tricentis Tosca and derive capability. It's a user-friendly tool. It's not very complex."
"The solution has plenty of features compared to other solutions."
"It's a simple tool, particularly in terms of system testing. You can also convert and automate using Tricentis Tosca with ease."
"The screenshot tool defaults to a screen layout instead of a full page test. I find it a bit cumbersome that I can't have it run a full screenshot as my default."
"There should be more detailed training on CrossBrowserTesting."
"Being able to test on real devices via the virtual connection is wonderful, but it can cause some lag and load time issues while testing."
"It would be useful if we can run the live-testing test cases on multiple platforms at the same time, instead of waiting for one session to finish."
"A wider range of physical devices with more browser versions in the Selenium Grid would be great to insure users with out-of-date devices are able to interact with our sites."
"A problem that we are facing quite often is related to the network connection. Tests can fail if the remote CrossBrowserTesting's VM has connection problems. This happens mostly with browsers of Internet Explorer family which work on Windows OS."
"Elements of 'real' mobile/tablet testing could be sped up."
"Sometimes the testing is slow."
"The solution is expensive."
"Many times when we have raised a ticket, we did not get an urgent response."
"The product needs to improve its pricing. It also needs to improve the infrastructure and DEX agent setup."
"There should be ease of data manipulation within automation test cases."
"The product needs to improve object identification. The identify with properties and anchor methods work perfectly, while the by-index and image methods may face challenges."
"In Tosca, I see that there are no user guides."
"I have found that some of the functions could be missed in the solution for new users. They are not obviously present."
"They need to improve on the reports after the execution of automation tests, since all the current organizations are looking for detailed graphical reports."
Earn 20 points
CrossBrowserTesting is ranked 28th in Functional Testing Tools while Tricentis Tosca is ranked 1st in Functional Testing Tools with 98 reviews. CrossBrowserTesting is rated 9.0, while Tricentis Tosca is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of CrossBrowserTesting writes "Static screenshots are the feature most often used, because they are a simple method of detecting problems". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Tricentis Tosca writes "Does not require coding experience to use and comes with productivity and time-saving features ". CrossBrowserTesting is most compared with BrowserStack, Bitbar, LambdaTest and Automai AppVerify, whereas Tricentis Tosca is most compared with Katalon Studio, OpenText UFT One, Worksoft Certify, Postman and Testim. See our CrossBrowserTesting vs. Tricentis Tosca 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.
