We performed a comparison between CrossBrowserTesting and Ranorex Studio based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Perforce and others in Functional Testing Tools."The screen shot portal is essential for an easy way to run tests across hundreds of browsers and retrieve screenshots which then indicate success or failure."
"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."
"I can run a page through the screenshot tool, then send a URL with the results to my team."
"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."
"The support team is top-notch. I have a great relationship with them. They are extremely honest and responsive."
"SmartBear has excellent, informative webinars, so keep an eye out for those."
"Video recording of the script running in a cloud server."
"I have found CrossBrowserTesting to be scalable."
"The solution is stable."
"Support is very quick. You can write to them and on the same day, they will respond. This is one of the best features."
"The most valuable feature of Ranorex Studio is its user-friendly interface."
"The solution is intuitive and pretty self-sustaining. You don't need a lot of help with it in terms of setup or assistance."
"I'm from a UFT background, so Ranorex Studio has a similar feel in terms of how it handles objects. It just felt familiar even though I'd never seen it before. However, it doesn't have all the bells and whistles of UFT, but it's a pretty good start, and it's cost-effective."
"This is a powerful, reliable and versatile all-around application testing suite."
"Object identification is good."
"The solutions's regression testing is very important for our company, as is the continuous integration process."
"I have had quite a few issues trying to use a virtual machine to test our application on."
"The speed connection in mobile devices could be improved, because sometimes the load time is uncertain."
"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."
"Sometimes, some of their instances fail, particularly in older versions of browsers."
"Sometimes the testing is slow."
"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."
"There should be more detailed training on CrossBrowserTesting."
"Ranorex is used in Windows while other solutions, for example, Katalon Studio, are cross-platform. (But in my opinion, overall, Ranorex is better)."
"For our purposes it requires integration with other products to get out the results in the format we want them. Adding this to the product could improve it."
"The automation of the SAP application could perhaps be improved to make it much simpler."
"Part of the challenge is that Ranorex's support is over in Europe, so we can't get responses on the same day. If we had support in the United States that was a bit more timely, that would be helpful."
"Binding to other sources is very good but the object recognition in .NET desktop applications often doesn't work."
"I'd like to know their testing strategies and to know what they can automate and what they can't. It can become pretty frustrating if you're trying to automate something that changes on a monthly or weekly basis."
"I would like to be able to customize the data grids. They are currently written in Visual Basic and we are unable to get down to the cell level without hard-code."
"The solution does not support dual or regression testing."
Earn 20 points
CrossBrowserTesting is ranked 27th in Functional Testing Tools while Ranorex Studio is ranked 12th in Functional Testing Tools with 46 reviews. CrossBrowserTesting is rated 9.0, while Ranorex Studio is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of CrossBrowserTesting writes "Static screenshots are the feature most often used, because they are a simple method of detecting problems". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Ranorex Studio writes "Good data security, allowing local installations to prevent data from going to the internet". CrossBrowserTesting is most compared with BrowserStack, Bitbar, Tricentis Tosca, LambdaTest and Sauce Labs, whereas Ranorex Studio is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, SmartBear TestComplete, froglogic Squish and OpenText UFT One.
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.
