We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"The initial setup is straightforward. Deployment took about seven months."
"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."
"The most valuable aspect of Selenium is that it gives you the flexibility to customize or write your own code, your own features, etc. It's not restricted by licensing."
"The solution is very flexible; there are different ways of using it. It's open-source and has a lot of support on offer."
"The most valuable feature is the Selenium grid, which allows us to run tests in parallel."
"Ability to integrate with every other tool."
"What I like the most about this product is that it gives us a lot of freedom to code anything, there is no restriction on the type of function you can do."
"I like that it is a robust and free open source. There is a lot of community support available, and there are a lot of developers using them. There's good community support."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is regression testing tools."
"The solution helps improve the stability of our product. It also decreases the work of our manual quality assurance engineers."
"The solution is great as a record and playback tool. It also has valuable regression testing."
"Complete works perfectly with CUTE. That includes all dialogues, right-click menus, or system dialogues, etc., which are handled well."
"The reporting is ready to use and doesn't require any setup."
"The most valuable features are the desktop and mobile modules."
"TestComplete is simple, it's a very easy-to-use tool."
"The database checkpoints detect problems which are difficult for a human resource to find."
"Technical support isn't very good. Sometimes their recommendations were not very clear."
"The solution is open-source, so everyone relies on the community to assist with troubleshooting and information sharing. If there's a complex issue no one has faced, it may take a while to solve the problem."
"The solution's UI path needs to be modernized."
"The solution does not offer up enough information in regards to personality testing."
"I would like to see XPath made more reliable so that it can be used in all browsers."
"Could have additional readability and abstraction."
"Selenium is good when the team is really technical because Selenium does less built-in methods. If it came with more built-in and pre-built methods it would be even easier for less technical people to work with it. That's where I think the improvement can be."
"There should be standardized frameworks to build automation."
"The artificial intelligence needs to be improved."
"The solution needs Mac OS support. Right now, the solution has only been developed to accommodate Windows OS."
"The solution needs more training manuals or some form of online forum for learning. It needs more documentation."
"The solution needs to extend the possibilities so that we can test on other operating systems, platforms and publications for Android as well as iOS."
"The test object repository needs to be improved. The hierarchy and the way we identify the objects in different applications, irrespective of technology, needs adjustments. The located and test objects are not as flexible compared to other commercial tools."
"The licensing costs are a little bit high and should be reduced."
"Name Mapping feature should be clearer. Whenever I use it, I do not really know what will work and what will not work."
"Stability issues occurred only when connecting to the SourceSafe. Sometimes, after getting the latest version, the tool hangs and it should be reopened in order to recover."
"We are satisfied with the pricing."
"It's an open-source tool that you can work with at any time without any cost."
"This is an open-source product so there is no cost other than manpower."
"It is all free."
"Selenium is an open-source solution, and It's free."
"Selenium is open-source."
"Selenium is a free tool."
"This is a pay-per-use service that is not expensive, and cost-efficient if you have a small team."
"The option we chose was around $2,000 USD."
"The licensing costs are in the range of $1,000 to $3,000."
"The license price for a physical machine is cheap, and for virtual machine, it is very expensive."
"Our ROI is about $10,000 a year."
"The pricing is a little above average — it could be lower."
"It costs a few hundred per year, but I am not sure. It is not at all expensive as compared to other tools."
Selenium HQ is a suite of tools to automate web browsers across many platforms. Selenium runs in many browsers and operating systems and can be controlled by many programming languages and testing frameworks. Selenium consist of two types:
TestComplete is a powerful and robust automated testing tool for mobile, web and desktop applications. Quickly and easily create accurate and repeatable tests across multiple devices, platforms and environments – regardless of experience level. It supports multiple languages, modern control sets and integrates with open source frameworks and tools like Selenium, SoapUI and Jenkins.
Selenium HQ is ranked 3rd in Regression Testing Tools with 26 reviews while SmartBear TestComplete is ranked 4th in Regression Testing Tools with 14 reviews. Selenium HQ is rated 7.6, while SmartBear TestComplete is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Selenium HQ writes "Highly customizable and the best tool out there to do automated testing". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SmartBear TestComplete writes "Speed, configuration consistency, and accuracy of tests with fantastic results". Selenium HQ is most compared with Eggplant Digital Automation Intelligence, Worksoft Certify, Tricentis Tosca, Appium and Ranorex Studio, whereas SmartBear TestComplete is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Katalon Studio, Micro Focus UFT One, Ranorex Studio and froglogic Squish. See our Selenium HQ vs. SmartBear TestComplete report.
We monitor all Regression 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.