We performed a comparison between Galen Framework and Selenium HQ based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Perforce and others in Functional Testing Tools."What I like most about Galen Framework are its advantages, particularly its spec language and the spec file feature."
"The most valuable features of this solution are its flexibility, being open source, and it has close to no limits when it comes to integrating with any language, or browser you are using."
"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."
"Selenium HQ's most valuable feature is its online community support, which is comprehensive and easy to access."
"Selenuim helps us during testing. We are able to reduce the number and frequency of manual efforts by using scripts."
"It supports most of the actions that a user would do on a website."
"It's not too complicated to implement."
"Data parametrization and parallelization are the most important features in any automation tool."
"The most valuable features are the ability to test and debug."
"There don't seem to be functions available for automatically generating Galen values based on the specifications in the spec file, and this could be a potential improvement for Galen Framework."
"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."
"They should leverage the tools for supporting Windows apps."
"Selenium HQ doesn't have any self-healing capabilities."
"Selenium could offer better ways to record and create scripts. IDE is available, however, it can be improved."
"There's no in-built reporting available."
"I would like to see some reporting or test management tools."
"One limitation of Selenium is that it is purely focused on web application testing."
"We'd like to see some more image management in future releases."
Galen Framework is ranked 25th in Functional Testing Tools with 2 reviews while Selenium HQ is ranked 5th in Functional Testing Tools with 102 reviews. Galen Framework is rated 8.6, while Selenium HQ is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Galen Framework writes "Scalable with strong reporting capabilities". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Selenium HQ writes "Easy to use with great pricing and lots of documentation". Galen Framework is most compared with , whereas Selenium HQ is most compared with Eggplant Test, Tricentis Tosca, Worksoft Certify, Telerik Test Studio and OpenText Silk Test.
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.