We performed a comparison between Panaya Test Dynamix and Selenium HQ based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Perforce and others in Functional Testing Tools."The test repository to follow the test progress is most valuable because we can easily create and manage a huge number of test scripts. We can copy and paste, replicate, and drag and drop many tests scripts. We can create test scripts en masse. When you have a high volume of tests, the tool is quite useful. It works well when you want to manage a lot of tests, such as you have 1,000 or more test scripts."
"Provides better monitoring for testing campaigns and business process testing."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to copy the scenarios and as we do a rollout we can efficiently complete test three and put it somewhere else under a new subsidiary."
"Test migration from HPE are done automatically. We can extract our tests from HPE, and they convert it into the Panaya format."
"The solution helps with recording and documentation."
"The initial setup was not complex and the product itself is very easy to configure and use."
"It is easy for business users to use who are not familiar with testing tools."
"The most valuable features are ExpectedConditions, actions, assertions, verifications, flexible rates, and third-party integrations."
"Data parametrization and parallelization are the most important features in any automation tool."
"The primary benefit is its cost and the ability to use the cloud."
"The most valuable feature of Selenium HQ is the ability to create automatic tests that can replicate human behavior."
"The most valuable features of this solution are its flexibility, being open source, and it has close to no limits when it comes to integrating with any language, or browser you are using."
"Selenium HQ's most valuable feature is its online community support, which is comprehensive and easy to access."
"In general, I would say that the API set is the most valuable feature."
"The plugins, the components, and the method of the library with Selenium is very user defined."
"They provide options for custom fields or tabs, but customization of workflows would be great."
"The setup of Panaya Recorder is a bit complex. Panaya is a SaaS application, but you need to install some components on your computer. You need to set up your computer to allow Panaya Recorder to work. There are five or six things to do each time you install Panaya for any user. If you miss something, Panaya Recorder doesn't work. So, it is complex to install."
"It would be nice to be able to test offline. What I mean by that is today most of the time things are in the cloud, but sometimes when we are in factories and we do not have network access and we should be able to download a test script into our PCs and do the test offline. Once that is complete we can re-upload it when we have a network connection."
"Nothing is automatic."
"Support is reactive and in English only."
"It is not a licensed tool. The problem with that is that it won't be able to support Windows desktop applications. There is no support for Windows desktop applications. They can do something about it. Its user interface can also be improved, which is not great compared to the other latest tools. Anybody who has been working on functional testing or manual testing cannot directly work on Selenium HQ without learning programming skills, which is a disadvantage."
"Selenium HQ can be complex. The interface requires a QA engineer or an expert to use it."
"To simplify the development process, everyone needs to do a Selenium Framework to acquire the web application functions and features from Selenium methods."
"It is not easy to make IE plus Selenium work good as other browsers. Firefox and Chrome are the best ones to work with Selenium."
"It would be awesome if there was a standalone implementation of Selenium for non-developer users."
"Selenium could offer better ways to record and create scripts. IDE is available, however, it can be improved."
"Selenium Grid set-up is bit complex."
"It would be better if we could use it without having the technical skills to run the scripting test."
Panaya Test Dynamix is ranked 22nd in Functional Testing Tools with 5 reviews while Selenium HQ is ranked 4th in Functional Testing Tools with 102 reviews. Panaya Test Dynamix is rated 8.4, while Selenium HQ is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Panaya Test Dynamix writes "More than reliable, with satisfied results for our needs, and excellent testing options". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Selenium HQ writes "Continuously being developed and large community makes it easy to find solutions". Panaya Test Dynamix is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Worksoft Certify, Tricentis qTest, Zephyr Enterprise and OpenText ALM / Quality Center, whereas Selenium HQ is most compared with Eggplant Test, Tricentis Tosca, Worksoft Certify, Telerik Test Studio and OpenText Silk Test.
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.
