We performed a comparison between Appium and Tricentis Tosca based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Regression Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Obviously because of automation, it reduces manual testing efforts."
"Appium helps me to do as much as much as I want to."
"It runs completely flawlessly and seamlessly every day."
"The library is extensive so the driver interacts with most functions or actions on mobile devices."
"The solution is easy to use."
"It's an open-source solution with a very large community and available documentation."
"The best feature of Appium is that it allows you to inspect the element. With the Appium Inspector, you don't have to install another application to do the inspection. I also like that Appium has Android device connectivity. Currently, most people use Appium as automation software, and I haven't found any other tool that's more powerful than Appium."
"The latest versions of the solution are stable."
"The technical support is good, we were satisfied."
"It has helped teams within our organization become more aware of the testing requirements in terms of risk and priority."
"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."
"For beginners, the product is good, especially for those who are interested in the quality side of software testing."
"It's stable and reliable."
"The most valuable features of Tricentis Tosca are the ease of use, you do not need to program if you do not want to."
"I am impressed with the product's script test."
"The solution is script-less, so you don't need IT knowledge to use the solution in an operational way. This is the most valuable feature. It's also only one of two or three tools that can do good automation on SAP, and in my opinion, it's the best of those."
"There is always a concern about the amount of code that is required to enhance the automation process. The idea of having less code or no code is what we would like to see in future updates."
"An application developed on the Unity platform, such as a gaming application, objects are moving in that case. Interacting with those elements is still lacking in Appium. Appium doesn't have the internal library to play with the Unity platform. That is a huge lack right now."
"If it had more facility for configuration it would be a spectacular solution."
"Appium can improve when the case fails, there should be a feature where you can generate the report from Appium. Once you're on a test case, automatically the screenshot should be captured which would avoid manual intervention. These features would be beneficial to migrate to Appium."
"They should add an in-built framework."
"I rarely use Appium nowadays because I'm now at the managerial level, but the last time I used it, whenever I selected and clicked on an element, Appium was very slow. I tried to debug it, but I still couldn't find the problem, so this is an area for improvement in the solution. Another area for improvement lies with the connector and server. For example, the effort to get into the local machine sometimes causes the emulator to become slow, which then leads to failure in testing, and this is the usual issue I've encountered from Appium. An additional feature I'd like added to Appium in its next release is being able to do automation in iOS without using XPath and the name of the element. In Xcode, you can use previous UI tests for detecting elements, but in Appium, you have to use Xpath and the element name instead of being able to directly put the X-UiPath, which is what you can do in Xcode. In iOS as well, sometimes the element doesn't have a name or a path. Sometimes, there's also no element."
"Appium could improve by enabling record and run techniques similar to what they have in other licensing tools, such as Micro Focus. We have to all write the code, and then we can proceed."
"Stability is an area that needs some improvement."
"ScratchBook execution needs to be improved as Tosca crashes multiple times."
"The Test Management options are still weak - improvement is outlined, but not yet visible. I"
"Running the regression – if multiple lists are executed at once or if a list contains 200+ tests, it’s a pain to stop the execution."
"Security, UI, and basic performance improvements could be done to the product to enhance its use."
"It requires some coding customization that requires expertise."
"Tricentis Tosca's performance could be better. Sometimes when we are remapping or when it is loading it can take a lot of time. There are free solutions that have better performance in this area."
"I think the downside would be licensing costs which are very high."
"While the initial setup was straightforward, we required assistance with the configuration to ensure that everything was done correctly."
Appium is ranked 5th in Regression Testing Tools with 25 reviews while Tricentis Tosca is ranked 1st in Regression Testing Tools with 98 reviews. Appium is rated 8.0, while Tricentis Tosca is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Appium writes "It's easy to launch applications". 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 ". Appium is most compared with Katalon Studio, Perfecto, Xamarin Platform, Apache JMeter and SmartBear TestComplete, whereas Tricentis Tosca is most compared with Katalon Studio, OpenText UFT One, Worksoft Certify, Postman and Selenium HQ. See our Appium vs. Tricentis Tosca report.
See our list of best Regression Testing Tools vendors and best Regression Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Regression 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.