Most Helpful Review
Researched CrossBrowserTesting but chose Worksoft Certify: Helped us move from manual regression testing to continuous testing, with an increased scope
Live testing gives us the ability to identify potential issues on different browsers and devices proving to be a very...
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"The ease of use is superior to anything on the market. It's very easy to integrate. We've been very impressed with the tool. Because we primarily use the configuration with SAP, the integration is pretty seamless. But we have used our own in-house VB app as well, and it's worked very well with that."
"We love the Capture 2.0 feature. It seems to work very well."
"The ability to work with the data, with recordsets, and plug those into the scripts is very easy and very powerful. We use it extensively."
"It's script-free, which is really important for our end users because we are usually dealing with colleagues who are not developers and who do not always have the technical background of developing and scripting. It's very useful that there is a nice UI and the tool is script-free."
"One big advantage of Worksoft Certify is its integration with SAP Solution Manager..."
"It is very user-friendly with an appealing UI, unlike a lot of other automation tools that we have evaluated. The fact that it can be used to across SAP and non-SAP applications (including web-based apps) is a big advantage. Using Certify Process Capture functionality has helped in hassle free test design creation, without the need to spend any extra effort to capture test steps and screenshots. The integration elements across HPE ALM and Solution Manager also work well."
"If we write a new test that's 80 percent the same as an existing test, it is pretty straightforward to reuse the steps from existing tests for our new tests and build upon them."
"It is very easy to maintain. With scripts, I can change one line and in one step. Whatever I want, I can do. I don't need to be an expert to use it."
"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."
"Testing across devices and browsers without maintaining that inventory is invaluable."
"The product guides and resources are extensive and very helpful."
"Local testing for products with no public exposure is an advantage in development."
"This solution helps lower the overhead cost associated with buying multiple devices."
"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."
"CrossBrowserTesting allows us to test our site with real-world devices in real-world scenarios and find what we're missing."
"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 can run a page through the screenshot tool, then send a URL with the results to my team."
"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."
"In the past, when we've tried to automate some of our web apps, it has not been as robust. If there were one thing that could be improved, it's interaction with web applications. The issue we were running into is that it was harder to identify the objects than it is with some of the other architectured applications."
"The definitions for the objects need to be automated. They need to be recognized automatically by Worksoft Certify instead of changing them back and forth manually. This is also something that Worksoft is currently working on."
"Our interactions with technical support has not been the best always and there is room for improvement especially with respect to the time taken to respond to cases. However, with the right contacts and reasonable escalations we have always managed to get quick attention on our cases."
"One feature that we have been asking for has been to treat tests as code and store the source code for tests in a configuration management tool. Right now, for version control of testing, it's all internally within the tool. If we have a test of a business process and want to revive that test, our methodology now is purely manual work. We go into the tool, create a copy of the existing test, and call the next one: v2. Now, we have two of them and the only way you can tell them apart is by its naming convention."
"I would like to see the impact analysis integrated with the performance testing tool. We have multiple tools doing multiple items. I would like to have one common tool."
"We are looking for some enhancements on the Capture 2.0 tool. This would give us the ability to control it directly, like we could with Capture 1.0. Right now, Capture 2.0 doesn't really work for our Business Analysts."
"There was a change to Capture 2.0. In the end, there have been some challenges with the newer version. Therefore, the company testers, the local ones, do not want to use Capture 2.0."
"When it is unstable, there will be times when a test that we are running in Certify will just stop, and it will say, "Aborted." There will be errors. There will be no explanation as to why it happens. It has now happened maybe one out of 20 times. When it happens, I just tell our QA team to stop Certify and restart it, hoping we don't see it again."
"I would like for there to be more integration with BrowserStack and other platforms."
"Connectivity can sometimes mar the testing experience."
"I have had quite a few issues trying to use a virtual machine to test our application on."
"It would be useful if we can run the live-testing test cases on multiple platforms at the same time, instead of waiting for one session to finish."
"This solution would benefit from faster testing and support for more devices."
"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."
"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."
Pricing and Cost Advice
"We would purchase more licenses right now if they were cheaper. Pricing is a little bit of a hindrance."
"It is expensive compared to some of the other automation tools in the market. However, the benefits and ROI has proved that it has been a good investment."
"The initial upfront cost in terms of licenses, plus all the money that we spent developing tests, has proven it's worth. Now, we can do a regression test suite in ten days as opposed to sixteen weeks."
"Our ROI is primarily a reduction in testing time. The testing, when we were doing it manually, was 30 to 40 percent of the project's cost."
"We ended up buying too many licenses. They were very good at selling it to us, and probably oversold it a little. We bought 45 licenses and have never used more than twenty. However, they gave us a pretty significant discount on the bigger license, so it made sense for us to buy enough that we wouldn't have to go back and ask for more."
"We could use Certify to do robotic process automation, which is basically running a process on your correction system instead of your test system. Therefore, we may do that in the future."
"By using automation, it reduced about 75 percent of the time when compared to any other tool."
"Saving money and better quality, these are the benefits of Certify."
"This solution costs less than competing products."
"It is worth the pricing as the product is supported on multiple platforms and browsers."
"SmartBear offers bundles of products that work together."
Questions from the Community
Top Answer: It does allow for good reusability. When it's designed properly and utilized properly, we can put things in a way that… more »
Top Answer: The licensing is yearly.
Top Answer: The setup was quite simple. The website easily explains how to set it up and if you want to integrate it with BMP tools… more »
Top Answer: For small scale projects with 200-500 test cases involved, it is costly. But if it's a large project then it is much… more »
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
Compared 31% of the time.
Compared 26% of the time.
Compared 12% of the time.
Compared 4% of the time.
Compared 3% of the time.
Compared 23% of the time.
Compared 18% of the time.
Compared 8% of the time.
Compared 7% of the time.
Compared 7% of the time.
Compared 20% of the time.
Compared 10% of the time.
Compared 8% of the time.
Compared 7% of the time.
|Worksoft is a leading global provider of automation software for high-velocity business process testing and discovery. Enterprises worldwide use Worksoft intelligent automation to innovate faster, lower technology risk, reduce costs, improve quality, and deeply understand their real end-to-end business processes. Global 5000 companies across all industries choose Worksoft for high speed process discovery and functional testing of digital, web, cloud, mobile, big data, and dozens of enterprise applications, including SAP, Oracle, and Salesforce.com.||BrowserStack is a cloud-based cross-browser testing tool that enables developers to test their websites across various browserson different operating systems and mobile devices, without requiring users to install virtual machines, devices or emulators.|
CrossBrowserTesting is a cloud testing platform that gives instant access to 1500+ different real desktop and mobile browsers for testers, developers, and designers.
Learn more about Worksoft Certify
Learn more about BrowserStack
Learn more about CrossBrowserTesting
|Kraft, Reliant Energy, Richemont, Applied Materials, Siemens PLM, Mosaic, Dow Corning, ebay, IBM, Accenture, Fortis BC, US Government, Southwest Airlines||Microsoft, RBS, jQuery, Expedia, Citrix, AIG||St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Accenture, Sony, Los Angeles Times, ADP, Verizon, T-Mobile, Wistia|
Consumer Goods Company13%
Computer Software Company37%
Comms Service Provider11%
Financial Services Firm6%
Computer Software Company33%
Comms Service Provider21%
Financial Services Firm22%
Computer Software Company32%
Comms Service Provider16%
No Data Available
BrowserStack is ranked 18th in Functional Testing Tools with 2 reviews while CrossBrowserTesting is ranked 10th in Functional Testing Tools with 8 reviews. BrowserStack is rated 8.0, while CrossBrowserTesting is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of BrowserStack writes "Test against a huge range of device and browser combinations but expect some connectivity issues". On the other hand, the top reviewer of CrossBrowserTesting writes "Live testing gives us the ability to identify potential issues on different browsers and devices proving to be a very useful tool". BrowserStack is most compared with Perfecto, Sauce Labs, LambdaTest, Bitbar and HeadSpin, whereas CrossBrowserTesting is most compared with Sauce Labs, SmartBear TestComplete, Micro Focus UFT One and Tricentis Tosca. See our BrowserStack vs. CrossBrowserTesting report.
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.