We performed a comparison between BrowserStack and Worksoft Certify 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."BrowserStack has lots of devices to choose from."
"The most valuable feature is that it provides parallel and cross-browser testing. It enables us to run tests on multiple browsers or devices simultaneously."
"The product's initial setup phase was not very difficult."
"The most valuable features are the variety of tools available."
"I've worked on testing integrations with BrowserStack, particularly with a platform called IT. This involves testing the registration process, including receiving verification codes on devices and phones. BrowserStack has been excellent for testing these integrations, providing a seamless workflow development experience."
"Local testing for products with no public exposure is an advantage in development."
"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."
"The speed of the solution and its performance are valuable."
"The Capture 2.0 feature is good. Our clients like using it. It does not take long to create documentation."
"Automation using Worksoft Certify has saved our testing times by 40% to 50%."
"During our yearly upgrades, we have now gotten them down to ten days or less. We have Worksoft run all our integration tests, where it used to take probably six weeks to do that manually."
"For this SAP upgrade or implementation, the business users are creating building blocks in their areas, then they're changing the building blocks into long end-to-end scripts to do a complete end-to-end testing to speed up the UAT. It definitely has a bigger coverage of UAT testing."
"We prefer Worksoft over other platforms because it's a low-code solution"
"The Capture 2.0 feature is very intuitive, useful, and user-friendly. You can do so much with it now, versus the older version."
"Certify's web UI testing abilities for testing of modern applications like SAP Fiori was good when we started and they developed it to be even better. We all know that web applications can change objects in DOM quite fast and it breaks tests. To counter it Certify has made object recognition more flexible and generic, so we don't have any troubles."
"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."
"There is room for improvement in pricing."
"Connectivity can sometimes mar the testing experience."
"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."
"There is some stability issue in the product, making it in areas where improvements are required."
"We are having difficulty with the payment system for the BrowserStack team, as they only accept credit cards and we are encountering some issues."
"I would like to see clearer visibility."
"BrowserStack is scalable, but cost is significant for those living in Mexico."
"We're really hopeful for the mobile testing in Worksoft Certify going forward."
"For Execution Manager, I would like it to be more robust interface and be able to view the remote machines full screen instead of a little window."
"Technical support's first response to us is usually late."
"Worksoft Certify needs improvement on customization of reporting and how you report final outcomes."
"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."
"We ran into some issues with the version that we were on during the initial setup. We ran into a bug on one version, then they upgraded us to a new version, and we got hit with another bug. So, they had to put us in a beta. That was a little frustrating. However, besides the bugs that we ran into, the install was pretty straightforward."
"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."
"Performance on the web UI part, especially with some of the more comprehensive Fiori features, like the complex tables that are being used, could be improved. In those cases we have noticed a lot of execution-time increase with regards to the Certify solution."
BrowserStack is ranked 5th in Functional Testing Tools with 25 reviews while Worksoft Certify is ranked 6th in Functional Testing Tools with 64 reviews. BrowserStack is rated 8.0, while Worksoft Certify is rated 8.4. 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 Worksoft Certify writes "Enables us to automate end-to-end testing of our integration between S/4HANA and Salesforce.com". BrowserStack is most compared with LambdaTest, Sauce Labs, Perfecto, CrossBrowserTesting and Tricentis Tosca, whereas Worksoft Certify is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Selenium HQ, OpenText UFT One, Katalon Studio and Panaya Test Dynamix. See our BrowserStack vs. Worksoft Certify report.
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.