What is our primary use case?
We use Sauce Labs for the following:
- Executing automated functional tests across multiple applications in a combination of about 5 browsers/os. These include IE11, Safari (latest), Edge (latest), Firefox (latest) and Chrome (latest).
- Running manual exploratory testing across the same browser mentioned above to get a hands-on view of the application running in each of the environments.
- We use the screenshots and videos to share the bugs or issues found with the teams to assist in the resolution of the bugs.
How has it helped my organization?
Sauce Labs has improved the testing side of our organization in the following ways:
Sauce Labs runs a huge number of browser and operating system combinations it allows our teams to worry more about testing our applications than maintaining a combination of browser and os. Either through the Selenium grid or running the browsers locally. In essence, it allows our testers to concentrate on testing the application and not worrying about the infrastructure. It also allows us to target new browsers without the required setup of the new browser.
What is most valuable?
As stated earlier we use Sauce Labs for a combination of automated testing and manual testing. Therefore the most useful features are the ability to run the functional automated tests via Sauce Labs tunnels which allows access to applications in our internal network. The second most useful feature is the manual side. This allows our testers to quickly identify issues with the look and feel of our apps in the different browsers we support. I have not had a requirement for mobile testing so cannot advise on that side.
What needs improvement?
We have used Sauce Labs extensively for the last 5 years across automated and manual testing and have found some problems during this time. Firstly as we use Sauce Labs to connect the tunnel to connect to apps in our internal network we have found that during automated testing this can be very slow. This causes inconsistencies with the tests. It's very difficult to rely on a service when you can't be sure if a test will pass or fail the next time it runs. This means building in a lot of sync time into the tests which in turn slows them down. If this speed could be improved then the service would be much better.
For how long have I used the solution?
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
The pricing is clear on the site - I would say it is more expensive than some alternatives.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
Which version of this solution are you currently using?