We performed a comparison between Eggplant Digital Automation Intelligence (DAI) and Selenium HQ based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Based on the above criteria, Selenium HQ finishes just ahead of Eggplant DAI. Selenium users tell us testing times are faster and deliver great, accurate results. As it is open-source, it is very flexible and integrates well with every tool. Finally, as it is free, it is cost-effective, saves money, and helps organizations maintain profitability.
"The most valuable feature is the ability to create code from a flow chart, and then run the code through it."
"Everything is happening on the layout or display that is used by the user. Eggplant prompts processes, like 'click here,' or 'look for this image.' Eggplant makes it possible for QA people and BAs, working in the actual display, to check if the software is providing the right images, the right text, and the right results. They don't have to go inside the code or to the TCP/IP layer. Everything is happening at the highest level."
"The solution is a stable one."
"GUI testing is the strength of the tool. The tool works as expected, and the support response from eggPlant, as a company, has been quick and substantial."
"Good text reading ability."
"The solution is based on a Windows model, where adding users is just a few clicks. It is easy to manage users and add them."
"The features that we like the most are the developer interface and the ability to quickly develop and deploy tests."
"It is easy to set up."
"The tool is easy to use and log in with respect to other tools. It is open-source. We can customize the product. I also like its security."
"There is a supportive community around it."
"The most valuable features of Selenium HQ are it is open-source, has a good interface, and integrates well."
"The most valuable feature of Selenium is how easy it is to automate."
"It's not too complicated to implement."
"The most valuable features of Selenium HQ are the automation of all UI tests, its open-source, reliability, and is supported by Google."
"The stability of the solution has been good, it is reliable we have not had any bugs."
"The stability and performance are good."
"The IDE could be even more full-featured. Because I was a developer, I was very spoiled by either Visual Studio Code or Visual Studio for shortcuts. For example, I was able to say "ctor" and hit Tab and it would create a template of a constructor for me... It would be great, when I want to create a new function, if there were shortcut commands like those that helped create all of the functions, or if there were shortcut features to do any of the complex plans."
"I would like to see standardized actions already built into Eggplant. For example, "wait eight seconds". That way, I wouldn't need to create it as an action. Right now, I have to program that wait and describe it as an action so that everybody knows it is an action that waits eight seconds... That way, somebody who is not familiar with programming processes like "if-else", or "for", or "while", would be able, from the first moment, and without programming, to put some easy-to-use, standardized, actions in place."
"If one area could be improved, it would be some of their documentation. In particular, some of their online help and user support documentation is a little bit out of date and could be revised and updated on a more frequent basis. Other than that, I haven't really found any issues or problems."
"We found that we had issues regarding the VPN setup, which is one of the reasons that we did not purchase this solution."
"It has low productivity."
"There was no free trial in it."
"Eggplant Test should emphasize on improving its offering in non-Windows environments."
"They need to update the Linux. I think it's kind of an outdated Java Swing application."
"For now, I guess Selenium could add some other features like object communications for easy expansion."
"The stop control needs to be improved with a configuration tool to enable desktop support."
"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."
"We can only use Selenium HQ for desktop applications which would be helpful. We are only able to do online based applications."
"The solution is open-source, so everyone relies on the community to assist with troubleshooting and information sharing. If there's a complex issue no one has faced, it may take a while to solve the problem."
"I would like for the next release to support parallel testing."
"Katalon has built a UI on top of Selenium to make it more user-friendly, as well as repository options and the ability to create repositories for objects, among other things. It would be helpful if this type of information could be included in the Selenium tool itself, so people wouldn't have to do filing testing."
"It does require a programming skill set. I would like the product not to require a heavy programming skill set and be more user-friendly for someone without a programming background."
Eggplant Test is ranked 12th in Test Automation Tools with 16 reviews while Selenium HQ is ranked 4th in Regression Testing Tools with 102 reviews. Eggplant Test is rated 7.8, while Selenium HQ is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Eggplant Test writes "Empowers effective test automation with comprehensive platform coverage and scalability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Selenium HQ writes "Continuously being developed and large community makes it easy to find solutions". Eggplant Test is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, SmartBear TestComplete, froglogic Squish and OpenText UFT One, whereas Selenium HQ is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Worksoft Certify, Telerik Test Studio, OpenText Silk Test and Automation Anywhere (AA). See our Eggplant Test 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.
