CrossBrowserTesting Pros and Cons

The support team is top-notch. I have a great relationship with them. They are extremely honest and responsive.

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.

I can run a page through the screenshot tool, then send a URL with the results to my team.

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.

I am able to continuously test my new releases across browser versions without issues.

CrossBrowserTesting allows us to test our site with real-world devices in real-world scenarios and find what we're missing.

This solution helps lower the overhead cost associated with buying multiple devices.

SmartBear has excellent, informative webinars, so keep an eye out for those.

With screenshots, I can quickly verify a page looks universally good in minutes.

Record and Replay is the most used functionality for us, as we can record the test cases and play them on multiple combinations of platforms.

When I started to work on testing automation, I was very excited about how easy it is to run tests on different browsers. It was just a matter of configuration.

At the moment, all our deploys depend on results of automation. If the tests are failing, then we know that something is wrong at the early stages of development.

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.

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 "Getting Started" documentation for Selenium testing could be improved.

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.

This solution would benefit from faster testing and support for more devices.

I have had quite a few issues trying to use a virtual machine to test our application on.

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.

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.

Elements of 'real' mobile/tablet testing could be sped up.

The five minute timeouts can cause irritation if you have just popped away to consult some supporting documentation.

The speed connection in mobile devices could be improved, because sometimes the load time is uncertain.

Sometimes the testing is slow.