CrossBrowserTesting vs Visual Studio Test Professional comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between CrossBrowserTesting and Visual Studio Test Professional based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Perforce and others in Functional Testing Tools.
To learn more, read our detailed Functional Testing Tools Report (Updated: March 2024).
765,234 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"The support team is top-notch. I have a great relationship with them. They are extremely honest and responsive.""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 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.""The CrossBrowserTesting Selenium API and live test features have greatly improved our team's ability to quickly and effectively perform QA.""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.""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.""I am able to continuously test my new releases across browser versions without issues.""CBT has made it easier to troubleshoot issues across devices when we do not have actual access to those specific devices. I even opt for CBT sometimes when we do have access to the device just because it is easier."

More CrossBrowserTesting Pros →

"Visual Studio Test Pro is super helpful for my Microsoft app work.""The solution is very useful for compiling existing projects and developing new projects.""Customization is the most powerful feature of this product.""Performance-wise, it is a great tool.""Code testing is the most valuable feature of this solution for developing software.""It is a good and user-friendly tool.""Visual Studio is the easiest to use.""Visual Studio Test Professional is a very scalable solution."

More Visual Studio Test Professional Pros →

Cons
"Elements of 'real' mobile/tablet testing could be sped up.""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.""Sometimes, some of their instances fail, particularly in older versions of browsers.""We had some issues with the onboarding process and the cloud conductivity could improve.""A problem that we are facing quite often is related to the network connection. Tests can fail if the remote CrossBrowserTesting's VM has connection problems. This happens mostly with browsers of Internet Explorer family which work on Windows OS.""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.""The "Getting Started" documentation for Selenium testing could be improved.""The five minute timeouts can cause irritation if you have just popped away to consult some supporting documentation."

More CrossBrowserTesting Cons →

"The price is reasonable, but it's not the best.""Sometimes Visual Studio is slow. It uses a lot of resources like memory and processing power. You should optimize the performance by only installing what you need on your machine. Don't install unnecessary things that will slow your machine.""Over the years, I haven't identified any specific enhancements that I desire; Visual Studio has consistently met my requirements seamlessly and flawlessly.""Sometimes, the solution hangs, so its performance could be improved.""The vendor must release a lightweight version of the solution.""There are too many features with the product and I would like there to be less.""The solution can improve the startup time.""In Visual Studio we still don't have anything which can pinpoint memory leaks on a certain code line."

More Visual Studio Test Professional Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "The lowest price point is very reasonable. It is also useful if only one person in the company needs to check on the browser display."
  • "A few intermediary pricing options for small QA teams would be nice, e.g., unlimited screenshots, "as you need it" parallel tests, etc."
  • "CrossBrowserTesting offered the best value for its price."
  • "It is worth the pricing as the product is supported on multiple platforms and browsers."
  • "SmartBear offers bundles of products that work together."
  • More CrossBrowserTesting Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "For the cloud services option, you buy a subscription per account or per user. This costs around $52 a month per person."
  • "I think that the pricing is quite good."
  • "The pricing is expensive."
  • "We pay for the solution annually and the price could be reduced."
  • "There is a paid version of the solution as well as a community version that is free."
  • "Visual Studio Test Professional is a very expensive solution."
  • "The tool is expensive in my region."
  • "We pay a yearly licensing fee for Visual Studio Test Professional, which is expensive."
  • More Visual Studio Test Professional Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
    765,234 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Ask a question

    Earn 20 points

    Top Answer:The most valuable features of the solution are its ease of use and availability.
    Top Answer:Visual Studio Test Professional is not an expensive solution.
    Top Answer:The solution's documentation could be improved because it keeps disappearing from the solution. There used to be references material that were incorporated in the solution, but most of it has moved to… more »
    Ranking
    27th
    Views
    1,418
    Comparisons
    1,053
    Reviews
    0
    Average Words per Review
    0
    Rating
    N/A
    8th
    Views
    948
    Comparisons
    812
    Reviews
    30
    Average Words per Review
    278
    Rating
    8.6
    Comparisons
    Learn More
    Overview

    CrossBrowserTesting is a cloud testing platform that gives instant access to 1500+ different real desktop and mobile browsers for testers, developers, and designers.

    • Native debugging tools make manual testing easy to inspect and correct HTML, CSS, and JavaScript errors on any browser.
    • Take automated screenshots across multiple browsers at once, then compare side-by-side against historical test runs.
    Visual Studio Professional Edition provides an IDE for all supported development languages. As of Visual Studio 2010, the Standard edition was dropped. MSDN support is available as MSDN Essentials or the full MSDN library depending on licensing. It supports XML and XSLT editing, and can create deployment packages that only use ClickOnce and MSI. It includes tools like Server Explorer and integration with Microsoft SQL Server also. Windows Mobile development support was included in Visual Studio 2005 Standard, however, with Visual Studio 2008, it is only available in Professional and higher editions. Windows Phone 7 development support was added to all editions in Visual Studio 2010. Development for Windows Mobile is no longer supported in Visual Studio 2010; it is superseded by Windows Phone 7.
    Sample Customers
    St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Accenture, Sony, Los Angeles Times, ADP, Verizon, T-Mobile, Wistia
    Transport for Greater Manchester, Ordina, Bluegarden A/S, CLEAResult, Jet.com, OSIsoft, Australian Taxation Office, BookedOut, Tracasa
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm21%
    Healthcare Company14%
    Computer Software Company14%
    University7%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company18%
    Financial Services Firm14%
    Government9%
    Healthcare Company6%
    REVIEWERS
    Computer Software Company35%
    Financial Services Firm10%
    Healthcare Company6%
    Manufacturing Company6%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company17%
    Financial Services Firm16%
    Manufacturing Company7%
    Insurance Company7%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business35%
    Midsize Enterprise22%
    Large Enterprise43%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business22%
    Midsize Enterprise16%
    Large Enterprise62%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business23%
    Midsize Enterprise27%
    Large Enterprise50%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business19%
    Midsize Enterprise14%
    Large Enterprise67%
    Buyer's Guide
    Functional Testing Tools
    March 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Perforce and others in Functional Testing Tools. Updated: March 2024.
    765,234 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    CrossBrowserTesting is ranked 27th in Functional Testing Tools while Visual Studio Test Professional is ranked 8th in Functional Testing Tools with 46 reviews. CrossBrowserTesting is rated 9.0, while Visual Studio Test Professional is rated 8.6. 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 Visual Studio Test Professional writes "Customization is a key feature as is the ability to integrate with third-party services ". CrossBrowserTesting is most compared with BrowserStack, Bitbar, Tricentis Tosca, LambdaTest and Sauce Labs, whereas Visual Studio Test Professional is most compared with TFS, Apache JMeter, Tricentis NeoLoad, SmartBear TestComplete and OpenText UFT One.

    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.