We performed a comparison between BrowserStack and CrossBrowserTesting 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."The most valuable feature of BrowserStack is the ability to do manual testing."
"The product guides and resources are extensive and very helpful."
"BrowserStack's best feature is browser testing across different platforms, including mobile."
"The main core concept behind this product is, it takes the overhead of maintaining all of your devices or particular computers. It continuously adds the latest devices that are coming into the market."
"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."
"I have found that BrowserStack is stable."
"The product's initial setup phase was not very difficult."
"It has increased the speed of our regression testing."
"Record and Replay is the most used functionality for us, as we can record the test cases and play them on multiple combinations of platforms."
"I can run a page through the screenshot tool, then send a URL with the results to my team."
"I have found CrossBrowserTesting to be scalable."
"SmartBear has excellent, informative webinars, so keep an eye out for those."
"Each new session started with the live testing feature allows for a cleared browser and new experience to be able to not only see these attributes on the page clearly but also pass clean data."
"The CrossBrowserTesting Selenium API and live test features have greatly improved our team's ability to quickly and effectively perform QA."
"When developing new pages that have questionable functionality or coding, we will often use CBT to test it in a browser. CBT works with our testing environment and development site."
"I haven't seen AI in BrowserStack, making it in an area where improvements are required in the product."
"Adding better integration with frameworks, particularly testing frameworks like Robot, would be of more value to customers and make their jobs easier."
"Customer support could be better. We tried to implement and explore this product with the vendor or reseller's help, but we haven't had any good response about the product."
"Sometimes BrowserStack is really slow and devices are not loading. it is really annoying and that's why we bought several newer devices because sometimes it's affecting us a lot."
"There is some stability issue in the product, making it in areas where improvements are required."
"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."
"BrowserStack operates at a slow pace, it could improve by making it faster."
"If you are inactive for 30 minutes, the solution will close."
"I have had quite a few issues trying to use a virtual machine to test our application on."
"Being able to test on real devices via the virtual connection is wonderful, but it can cause some lag and load time issues while testing."
"A wider range of physical devices with more browser versions in the Selenium Grid would be great to insure users with out-of-date devices are able to interact with our sites."
"The speed connection in mobile devices could be improved, because sometimes the load time is uncertain."
"The screenshot tool defaults to a screen layout instead of a full page test. I find it a bit cumbersome that I can't have it run a full screenshot as my default."
"A problem that we are facing quite often is related to the network connection. Tests can fail if the remote CrossBrowserTesting's VM has connection problems. This happens mostly with browsers of Internet Explorer family which work on Windows OS."
"The "Getting Started" documentation for Selenium testing could be improved."
"I have experienced some lagging issues, and it does not seem like all of the testing environments are configured the same."
Earn 20 points
BrowserStack is ranked 4th in Functional Testing Tools with 25 reviews while CrossBrowserTesting is ranked 28th in Functional Testing Tools. BrowserStack is rated 8.0, while CrossBrowserTesting is rated 9.0. 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 CrossBrowserTesting writes "Static screenshots are the feature most often used, because they are a simple method of detecting problems". BrowserStack is most compared with LambdaTest, Sauce Labs, Perfecto, Tricentis Tosca and Bitbar, whereas CrossBrowserTesting is most compared with Bitbar, Tricentis Tosca, LambdaTest, Sauce Labs and Automai AppVerify. See our BrowserStack vs. CrossBrowserTesting report.
See our list of best Functional 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.
