We performed a comparison between Appium and Selenium HQ 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."It has great documentation and excellent community support."
"The way Appium server interacts with mobile apps is fantastic. It provides all the information about the elements inside the app, Android as well as iOS. I can interact with the element quickly, just type some text or get some text values from the element - whether it's a drop-down, or web text, or a native element."
"The latest versions of the solution are stable."
"We get a list that shows all devices that are connected to the system."
"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 solution is stable."
"Appium has easy interaction with mobile."
"The most valuable features of Appium are the in-built functionality, which we can use in our code. For example, move back, move front, navigate one page before, and navigate one page ahead. You can do this by using the in-built functions from Appium."
"The most valuable features are the ability to test and debug."
"The main characteristic that is useful is that the tool is completely free."
"Ability to integrate with every other tool."
"The initial setup is straightforward. Deployment took about seven months."
"Selenium's open-source nature is a key advantage. Its extensive support for diverse web technologies."
"The testing solution produces the best web applications."
"In general, I would say that the API set is the most valuable feature."
"The most valuable features of Selenium HQ are the automation of all UI tests, its open-source, reliability, and is supported by Google."
"We previously worked with native applications, and there weren't any good mobile app testing tools. We started working with React Native, which works well with Appium, but it would be good to see better integration; the way elements are displayed can be messy. React Native is very popular nowadays, so it's essential to have that compatibility."
"One thing which can be really helpful is that there is some kind of a recorder made available rather than scripting everything."
"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."
"The initial setup is straightforward if you have previous experience with the solution, but it can be complicated for a novice user."
"The challenging part with Appium is that installation can be a bit tricky. It can be challenging to set up in Android versus iOS environments."
"The tool needs to add a dependency manager."
"Image recognition could be improved. We have some images in our mobile applications. It should be able to run from the cloud, so we can automate the catcher."
"Configuration-wise, there is a lot of room for improvement."
"I would like to see some reporting or test management tools."
"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."
"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."
"For now, I guess Selenium could add some other features like object communications for easy expansion."
"They should leverage the tools for supporting Windows apps."
"The initial setup of Selenium HQ is difficult in many areas, such as the framework."
"The reporting part can be better."
"For email-based applications, we can't automate as we would like to, making it necessary to bring in a third-party product to do so."
Appium is ranked 5th in Regression Testing Tools with 25 reviews while Selenium HQ is ranked 4th in Regression Testing Tools with 102 reviews. Appium is rated 8.0, while Selenium HQ is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Appium writes "It's easy to launch applications". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Selenium HQ writes "Continuously being developed and large community makes it easy to find solutions". Appium is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, Perfecto, Xamarin Platform and Apache JMeter, whereas Selenium HQ is most compared with Eggplant Test, Tricentis Tosca, Worksoft Certify, Telerik Test Studio and OpenText Silk Test. See our Appium vs. Selenium HQ report.
See our list of 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.