We performed a comparison between BrowserStack and CrossBrowserTesting based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Perforce and others in Functional Testing Tools."It just added some flexibility. There was nothing that improved our coding standards, etc. because all of our UIs were functional before we tried it."
"We like the model device factory for iOS and Android devices."
"The product guides and resources are extensive and very helpful."
"It's helpful for me to test on different devices."
"BrowserStack has lots of devices to choose from."
"I have found that BrowserStack is stable."
"The most valuable feature of BrowserStack is the ability to do manual testing."
"It is a stable solution. There's no lagging and jittering."
"The ability to replay sessions is valuable for tracking down issues."
"The extensive range of products available to simulate is something I have come to appreciate as it has resulted in an ability to broaden the scope of our tests."
"This solution helps lower the overhead cost associated with buying multiple devices."
"I am able to continuously test my new releases across browser versions without issues."
"The features that I find most useful and the ones that I use the most are local site testing, device and browser testing, and screenshots."
"It was the perfect solution that saved us time and money to perform web viewing tests on real devices, which allowed our team to correct multiple failures in devices."
"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."
"BrowserStack should work on its Internet connectivity although issues only occur occasionally."
"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."
"I would like for there to be more integration with BrowserStack and other platforms."
"It is difficult to use for someone who has little to no experience."
"I would like to see clearer visibility."
"There is room for improvement in pricing."
"Adding better integration with frameworks, particularly testing frameworks like Robot, would be of more value to customers and make their jobs easier."
"One of the biggest issues with BrowserStack is that if you don't have your network set up by the book, it's hard to get it to work with local desk machines."
"The "Getting Started" documentation for Selenium testing could be improved."
"I have had quite a few issues trying to use a virtual machine to test our application on."
"I have experienced some lagging issues, and it does not seem like all of the testing environments are configured the same."
"We had some issues with the onboarding process and the cloud conductivity could improve."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"Elements of 'real' mobile/tablet testing could be sped up."
Earn 20 points
BrowserStack is ranked 5th in Functional Testing Tools with 25 reviews while CrossBrowserTesting is ranked 27th 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, Bitbar and Tricentis Tosca, whereas CrossBrowserTesting is most compared with Bitbar, Tricentis Tosca, LambdaTest, Sauce Labs and Automai AppVerify.
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.
