CrossBrowserTesting Review

Static screenshots are the feature most often used, because they are a simple method of detecting problems

What is our primary use case?

When developing new pages that have questionable functionality or coding, we will often use CBT to test it in a variety of browsers and devices. CBT works with our testing environment and development site.  Our greatest concern is universal appearance and functionality, thus we test a great many browsers.

How has it helped my organization?

Our site's conversion from a static to an adaptive flexible layout was a major goal for our web site, and CrossBrowserTesting was an invaluable tool for trying out that new code. Cross-device testing was essential.

We could not have been certain that we would have achieved our goal without it.

What is most valuable?

Static screenshots are the feature most often used, because they are a simple method of detecting problems. I can run a page through the screenshot tool, then send a URL with the results to my team. Though it is probably a minor part of what CBT does, I find it the most useful.

What needs improvement?

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. Every time, I have to select the full screen, then restart its captures, which seems a waste of time and energy.  This is, admittedly, a minor complaint.

For how long have I used the solution?

Over six years.

How are customer service and technical support?

CBT's customer service is amazing. They respond to comments and queries quickly and with great interest in resolving any problems.

How was the initial setup?

Usage of this tool is very simple and straightforward.

What was our ROI?

At first we had purchased a huge license for use by many members of the team, but this was costly and we found we didn't use it nearly enough to warrant that.  We scaled it back to one login for one tester.  I'd advise anyone else to start small and only grow the size of the license if needed.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

We originally had a huge license where every member of our team had a sign-in for the tool, but found that was overkill.  We don't use anywhere near the number of minutes we were paying for, so we scaled it back to one ID for the person who does the testing.  I'd say start small and expand if you find you need it; it will certainly vary depending on your needs.

One problem we've had is the annual license.  We have to have our team's assistant do the license on the company card, and then the company emails me addressing me by her name.  Sometimes it's difficult to straighten it out.  Since CBT deals with companies as its primary user base, I should think it would be easier to handle the annual renewal.

**Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
More CrossBrowserTesting reviews from users
Find out what your peers are saying about SmartBear, BrowserStack, Sauce Labs and others in Functional Testing Tools. Updated: May 2021.
501,151 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Add a Comment