We performed a comparison between BrowserStack and Selenium HQ 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."It's helpful for me to test on different devices."
"Local testing for products with no public exposure is an advantage in development."
"I like that it offers full device capability."
"It is a scalable solution."
"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."
"The most valuable feature is the variety the solution offers around the different types of devices, especially mobile devices."
"We like the model device factory for iOS and Android devices."
"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."
"There is a supportive community around it."
"The primary benefit is its cost and the ability to use the cloud."
"The most valuable features are the ability to test and debug."
"You can build your own framework. I think that's the most powerful feature. You can connect with a lot of other tools that use frameworks, or keywords, etc. That helps make it a stronger solution."
"Selenium's open-source nature is a key advantage. Its extensive support for diverse web technologies."
"Selenium has helped to complete tests in less time, which would not be possible relying on manual testing only."
"It supports multiple processes, which is great."
"We found the initial setup to be straightforward."
"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."
"I haven't seen AI in BrowserStack, making it in an area where improvements are required in the product."
"It is difficult to use for someone who has little to no experience."
"Adding better integration with frameworks, particularly testing frameworks like Robot, would be of more value to customers and make their jobs easier."
"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."
"Occasionally, there are disruptions in the connection which can interfere with our testing processes, especially when testing on phones."
"I would like for there to be more integration with BrowserStack and other platforms."
"We had some execution issues."
"We can only use Selenium HQ for desktop applications which would be helpful. We are only able to do online based applications."
"Selenium has room for improvement as it does not support the tests and result-sharing in anything but a manual way."
"In the beginning, we had issues with several test cases failing during regression. Over a period of time, we built our own framework around Selenium which helped us overcome of these issues."
"Selenium HQ can be complex. The interface requires a QA engineer or an expert to use it."
"The solution does not offer up enough information in regards to personality testing."
"I would like to see automatic logs generated."
"There's no in-built reporting available."
"I would like to see Selenium HQ support legacy platforms."
BrowserStack is ranked 5th in Functional Testing Tools with 25 reviews while Selenium HQ is ranked 4th in Functional Testing Tools with 102 reviews. BrowserStack is rated 8.0, while Selenium HQ is rated 8.0. 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 Selenium HQ writes "Continuously being developed and large community makes it easy to find solutions". BrowserStack is most compared with LambdaTest, Sauce Labs, Perfecto, CrossBrowserTesting and OpenText UFT One, whereas Selenium HQ is most compared with Eggplant Test, Tricentis Tosca, Worksoft Certify, Telerik Test Studio and Katalon Studio. See our BrowserStack vs. Selenium HQ report.
See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors and best Regression 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.
