We performed a comparison between BrowserStack and Selenium HQ 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."Local testing for products with no public exposure is an advantage in development."
"The most valuable feature is the variety the solution offers around the different types of devices, especially mobile devices."
"I like that it offers full device capability."
"The setup was quite simple. The website easily explains how to set it up and if you want to integrate it with BMP tools there are online simple step tutorials."
"The product's initial setup phase was not very difficult."
"Maintenance of the solution is easy."
"BrowserStack's best feature is browser testing across different platforms, including mobile."
"The speed of the solution and its performance are valuable."
"The most valuable feature of Selenium HQ is it provides support for third-party tools, such as screenshots, and automates Windows-based applications."
"The most valuable features of Selenium HQ are it is open-source, has a good interface, and integrates well."
"In general, I would say that the API set is the most valuable feature."
"The stability and performance are good."
"The most valuable feature of Selenium is how easy it is to automate."
"Selenium WebDriver and Selenium IDE are useful."
"The solution is very easy to use. Once you learn how to do things, it becomes very intuitive and simple."
"The most valuable aspect of Selenium is that it gives you the flexibility to customize or write your own code, your own features, etc. It's not restricted by licensing."
"We had some execution issues."
"I would like for there to be more integration with BrowserStack and other platforms."
"While I was testing I was not 100% sure a that was properly mimicking the browsers or not. We had some issues with a browser, and the reason was the browser itself does not provide any support. If the local system does not provide any support, I think this was the problem. There should be better integration with other solutions, such as JIRA."
"Adding better integration with frameworks, particularly testing frameworks like Robot, would be of more value to customers and make their jobs easier."
"BrowserStack operates at a slow pace, it could improve by making it faster."
"We are struggling to do local testing."
"If you are inactive for 30 minutes, the solution will close."
"Connectivity can sometimes mar the testing experience."
"Selenium is good when the team is really technical because Selenium does less built-in methods. If it came with more built-in and pre-built methods it would be even easier for less technical people to work with it. That's where I think the improvement can be."
"Selenium has room for improvement as it does not support the tests and result-sharing in anything but a manual way."
"There are some tiny issues with SeleniumHQ. For example, with respect to the scraping tests. Sometimes, a website will have some hidden items or blockages that inhibit us from extracting data directly. It would be beneficial if Selenium could extract that information."
"For now, I guess Selenium could add some other features like object communications for easy expansion."
"One limitation of Selenium is that it is purely focused on web application 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."
"It would be better if we could use it without having the technical skills to run the scripting test."
"Technical support isn't very good. Sometimes their recommendations were not very clear."
BrowserStack is ranked 4th in Functional Testing Tools with 25 reviews while Selenium HQ is ranked 5th in Functional Testing Tools with 103 reviews. BrowserStack is rated 8.0, while Selenium HQ is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of BrowserStack writes "Good in the area of automation and offers a high test coverage to users". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Selenium HQ writes "Easy to use with great pricing and lots of documentation". BrowserStack is most compared with LambdaTest, Sauce Labs, Perfecto, Tricentis Tosca and OpenText UFT One, whereas Selenium HQ is most compared with Eggplant Test, Tricentis Tosca, Worksoft Certify, Telerik Test Studio and Katalon Studio. See our BrowserStack vs. Selenium HQ 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.
