We just raised a $30M Series A: Read our story

CrossBrowserTesting OverviewUNIXBusinessApplication

CrossBrowserTesting is the #16 ranked solution in our list of top Functional Testing Tools. It is most often compared to BrowserStack: CrossBrowserTesting vs BrowserStack

What is CrossBrowserTesting?

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.
Buyer's Guide

Download the Functional Testing Tools Buyer's Guide including reviews and more. Updated: September 2021

CrossBrowserTesting Customers

St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Accenture, Sony, Los Angeles Times, ADP, Verizon, T-Mobile, Wistia

CrossBrowserTesting Video

Archived CrossBrowserTesting Reviews (more than two years old)

Filter by:
Filter Reviews
Industry
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Company Size
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Job Level
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Rating
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Considered
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Order by:
Loading...
  • Date
  • Highest Rating
  • Lowest Rating
  • Review Length
Search:
Showingreviews based on the current filters. Reset all filters
reviewer1007001
User
Real User
A useful tool as it has the capability for functional testing, UI testing, automated testing just on few clicks.

What is our primary use case?

We develop web and mobile applications and need to test our applications across different browsers and different devices across all operating systems.

How has it helped my organization?

Due to serious testing needs across platforms and devices; we found CrossBrowserTesting a useful tool as it has the capability for functional testing, UI testing, automated testing just on few clicks.

What is most valuable?

We have saved the cost to buy in house devices.

Real device sessions instead of simulators

Screenshot test across the web and mobile devices at once which returns images

Shareable reports

Selection of the required device, Platform, and browsers.

What needs improvement?

Automated testing could be improved.

Test management feature where tests could be scripted.

Data-driven testing could be added.

For how long have I used the solution?

One to three years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Very few issues

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Excellent Product

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We used Telerik Test studio for CrossBrowserTesting but found CrossBrowserTesting miles better instead.

What was our ROI?

It has already paid cost back

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

Buying a license is cheaper than procurement of in house devices and there is no maintenance cost either.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

Yes, we compared with Test Studio

What other advice do I have?

Agile Support

Test script feature

Graphical Test Reports

Dashboard Widgets

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
reviewer874593
Software Quality Assurance Engineer
Vendor
Saves development time with the early discovery of platform-specific issues

Pros and Cons

  • "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."
  • "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."

What is our primary use case?

Our primary use cases for this solution are:

  • Feature validation of our product on multiple OS/mobile/browser combinations
  • To expose platform-specific issues early in the testing life cycle
  • To find usability issues and differences between desktop versus mobile versus tablets

How has it helped my organization?

This solution helps in the functional verification and regression testing phases of our product, as our solution is used on multiple OS/mobile/browser combinations.

Using CrossBrowserTesting, we run the test suites on multiple OS/mobile combinations with different browsers. Thereby, the platform-specific issues are discovered at an early stage.

What is most valuable?

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.

Live testing with the previous history of test cases is a useful feature.

Screenshot testing is a useful feature for applying the same test case on multiple browsers.

What needs improvement?

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.

It would be helpful to have more help notes or videos to show how to build an automation framework.

For how long have I used the solution?

Two years.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We did not use another solution prior to this.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

It is worth the pricing as the product is supported on multiple platforms and browsers.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We did not evaluate other solutions.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Find out what your peers are saying about SmartBear, BrowserStack, Sauce Labs and others in Functional Testing Tools. Updated: September 2021.
542,721 professionals have used our research since 2012.
reviewer1072422
User
Real User
Saves time and money by offering "real" devices for testing our application, but is sometimes unresponsive

Pros and Cons

  • "This solution helps lower the overhead cost associated with buying multiple devices."
  • "I have had quite a few issues trying to use a virtual machine to test our application on."

What is our primary use case?

Our primary use case is testing our application on various tablet/mobile devices. It is nice to have all of the devices you need in one place.

How has it helped my organization?

This solution helps lower the overhead cost associated with buying multiple devices. It saves time because we are not constantly upgrading to the latest OS on each device.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable feature is that it gives us "real" OS devices that are available to test. On top of that, we don't have to ensure that all of the devices are up to date. 

What needs improvement?

I have had quite a few issues trying to use a virtual machine to test our application on. Sometimes it will freeze or not respond. I cannot log in to our application because the VM does not always respond to keyboard functions.

I would also like to see more real devices in this list of those to choose from. I have had some of our customers come to us with bugs that are specific to a particular mobile device and I could not recreate the issue since we do not have the particular device and it is not on crossbrowser Galaxy S9 .Id like to see Galaxy Tab S4/ E lite added.  

For how long have I used the solution?

One to three years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

My impressions of the stability are neutral.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

I am the only tester to use the app. I am not sure how well it runs with multiple users at one time. I've noticed freezing and experience slow response time fairly often.

How are customer service and technical support?

Good customer service. No complaints here.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We did not use a solution prior to this one.

How was the initial setup?

This solution has a quick and easy setup.

What about the implementation team?

Our in-house team handled the implementation.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

The cost of this solution depends on size and demand.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We did not really evaluate other options before selecting this one.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
reviewer1041558
User
Real User
We use it for testing our sites on various desktop browsers and phone environments with different browser versions

What is our primary use case?

I used CrossBrowserTesting for testing on different browsers on desktop and phone environments with different browser versions for our sites.

How has it helped my organization?

CrossBrowserTesting helps a lot with the responsive testing in different mobiles and browsers and has good tools for our testing like taking videos and screenshots.

What is most valuable?

The local connection is pretty awesome at the moment of testing the developments created at home, and the tool getting the proof of your testing is awesome (videos and screenshots).

What needs improvement?

I had some problems with the local connection, but there is someone that can help us always on customer support chat. They solved my problem.

For how long have I used the solution?

Less than one year.

How are customer service and technical support?

The customer service was pretty great. Andrew made sure to get all the information needed to send my issue to the technical support.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

No. CrossBrowserTesting is my first tool and a pretty good one to use anytime.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
reviewer1026108
User
Real User
I am frequently using live testing to verify the UI in different devices and IE browser

What is our primary use case?

Use of CBT to test the UI in different mobile devices since the experience is different with a real device vs. resizing window browser. Also, it's very useful to test the UI in Internet Explorer.

How has it helped my organization?

It helps to speed up the process to test the product in different devices and browsers, making it easy to troubleshoot some issues.

What is most valuable?

I am frequently using live testing to verify the UI in different devices and IE browser. Also, I've started using a screenshot, but it is not very useful for me, since the page does not load properly without loading another CSS file.

What needs improvement?

  • The speed to connect to mobile devices needs improvement, and sometimes the connection fails. 
  • Possibility to use web inspector in all devices (it is not available for OS devices). 
  • Also, easy access to run local files. I need to run a CSS file before loading the website, and sometimes, it does not work.

For how long have I used the solution?

Less than one year.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

I had used BrowserStack; we switched to CBT because it is easy to have parallel users.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
marketacumen
President at Market Acumen, Inc.
User
An easy way to run tests across hundreds of browsers

Pros and Cons

  • "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."
  • "Sometimes, some of their instances fail, particularly in older versions of browsers."

What is our primary use case?

Primary use case is to run an online analytics company which requires JavaScript compatibility across all browsers. We use this tool to test and deploy release updates whenever changes are made. Also, they have a Selenium portal which is useful for doing browser testing for our administrative interface and automated user testing. Finally, they have the ability to launch live browser environments. This is invaluable in diagnosing customer issues and replicating problems within specific browsers.

How has it helped my organization?

We would not be able to provide our services without their tools. Their tools, or ones like it, are absolutely essential for us to provide high quality and continuous integration for our services.

What is most valuable?

  • Live browser testing: Testing customer issues.
  • Selenium access: Automated testing of the administrative interface, as well as automatic testing for new JavaScript releases of our tracking snippet.
  • 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.

What needs improvement?

Web user interface is "heavy" and slow to load. Some browser configurations do not work at all times. Account limits do not allow you to queue jobs - you must wait to submit until jobs complete. Could use improvements in ability to tag on create screen.

For how long have I used the solution?

More than five years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Sometimes, some of their instances fail, particularly in older versions of browsers. However, if you request these instances again, they succeed. I am guessing it is difficult to maintain legacy systems (particularly ones older than five to eight years).

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

No issues.

How are customer service and technical support?

The few times that I have had to work with their customer support, they have been responsive and addressed issues immediately. Overall, it has only been a few times over the past few years, and each time I have had my issue addressed and felt like they were attentive and responsive.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We previous use BrowserCam, and they went out of business.

How was the initial setup?

It is very easy to set up. Their Selenium environment has good documentation and their sample code works easily. Otherwise, the web app portion of the product is easy to use and work with.

What about the implementation team?

We implemented in-house.

What was our ROI?

If our service goes down or has a JavaScript error on particular browsers, our customers would notice and look for alternatives. I am able to continuously test my new releases across browser versions without issues.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We did evaluate others, but I do not recall the competition. CrossBrowserTesting offered the best value for its price.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
hima
User at R & L Carriers
User
The ability to choose from many devices is the best feature

Pros and Cons

  • "The ability to choose from many devices is the best feature."
  • "Sometimes the testing is slow."

What is our primary use case?

A wide variety of browser testing for most of my company's internal and frequently used websites.

How has it helped my organization?

CrossBrowserTesting improved my organization because it eliminates the need for a physical device with a tester to cover our used browsers. This saves the company money and time.

What is most valuable?

The ability to choose from many devices is the best feature. It also supports browsers and offers version selection to cover what we need.

What needs improvement?

Sometimes the testing is slow. The loading time could be improved for faster performance.

For how long have I used the solution?

Less than one year.

How are customer service and technical support?

I always had a wonderful response and great support from the customer service.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We had to use a physical device which was not available. We also had other technical problems that delayed testing time.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

It isn't very pricey and it always has a great support system available.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

No, my company chose, and I feel that they have made the best choice.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
ITCS user
QA Analyst / Software QC at Quartzy, Inc
Real User
With screenshots, I can quickly verify a page looks universally good in minutes

Pros and Cons

  • "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."

    What is our primary use case?

    Where I work as a QA analyst, we have developed a web app to help life scientists organize their labs and order lab supplies from a variety of manufacturers at low prices. 

    My primary use case of CrossBrowserTesting is to ensure new features that we have launched, or are about to launch, look correct and work as expected on all the most common browsers across the most common OSs.

    How has it helped my organization?

    This solution improves the customer experience using Quartzy. 

    It has saved us time and money on our web app. It would taken time to look across many devices and browser versions every time that we made changes to the front-end of the application. It also means less "broken pages" are seen by users by the time a feature is ready to launch.

    What is most valuable?

    I use the screenshot functionality most frequently and live testing on occasion. I have also used the record and replay functionality once or twice.

    With screenshots, I can quickly verify a page looks good universally in minutes. It is also shareable to all my coworkers, so reporting issues to engineering are simple.

    What needs improvement?

    A few intermediary pricing options for small QA teams would be nice, e.g., unlimited screenshots, "as you need it" parallel tests, etc.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    One to three years.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    No stability issues.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    No scalability issues.

    How are customer service and technical support?

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

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    We did not have a previous solution.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    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.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    We also looked at Selenium, Rainforest QA, and BrowserStack.

    What other advice do I have?

    Go for it! 

    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    ITCS user
    Founder - Creative Director at Mahebo
    Real User
    Saves us time and money to perform web viewing tests on real devices

    Pros and Cons

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

    What is our primary use case?

    We work in the web design/development sector. It is really important for us to bring the total warranty of sites to 100% mobile responsive. It is really difficult, but with CrossBrowserTesting, we can do all the testing that we need to do with it.

    How has it helped my organization?

    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.

    What is most valuable?

    The possibility of having a real-time web service with a large number of real devices with different operating systems and browser versions is a great advantage for us. 

    Other features from CrossBrowserTesting, like screenshots or screen recordings, are a nice plus in the service.

    What needs improvement?

    • The speed connection in mobile devices could be improved, because sometimes the load time is uncertain. 
    • The future possibility to do a web inspector to debug any site, on any device in any OS, would be a really nice feature for the service. This means not just with the web inspector included from each web navigator (Firefox, Chrome, IE, etc.).

    For how long have I used the solution?

    More than five years.
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    ITCS user
    Javascript Developer at IPONWEB
    Real User
    Live testing helps us to debug problems across all browsers. Tests can fail if the remote VM has connection problems.

    Pros and Cons

    • "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."
    • "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."

    What is our primary use case?

    We have a bunch of JavaScript libraries which are used on thousands of websites for showing advertisements. 

    When I had just joined the company, there were no tests at all and the deploying process was very unpredictable. Therefore, we decided to cover the libraries by unit and integration tests.

    How has it helped my organization?

    During first test stages of implementation, CrossBrowserTesting's live testing was helpful because my company is more about the server's programming and we do not have real devices for the manual testing of the UI. Then, 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.

    What is most valuable?

    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. Live testing helps us to debug problems across all browsers.

    What needs improvement?

    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. I would like CrossBrowserTesting's engineers to deal with this issue.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    One to three years.
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Maggie Jones
    QA Automation Engineer and Web Developer at cleverbridge
    Vendor
    Improves our team's ability to quickly and effectively perform QA

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

    What is our primary use case?

    I use CrossBrowserTesting to run Selenium tests in the cloud. I have created a custom QA automation tool for my company and integrated it with CrossBrowserTesting via the Selenium API. I send the commands to CrossBrowserTesting over the API and my tests get executed in the desired browsers/OS combinations. I also use the CrossBrowserTesting Selenium API to retrieve a full list of all browser/OS combos so my QA automation interface can allow users to choose what browsers they want to test.

    In addition, our entire front-end team uses the CrossBrowserTesting live testing feature to investigate browser issues and do manual QA testing.

    How has it helped my organization?

    The CrossBrowserTesting Selenium API and live test features have greatly improved our team's ability to quickly and effectively perform QA. We can access a specific browser/OS/device configuration extremely quick and our clients benefit from this as well, since we can test over a wider range of browsers, browser versions, and devices. Our automated testing tool takes screenshots as the tests execute, so now we also have the ability to archive our QA tests.

    What is most valuable?

    What sets CrossBrowserTesting apart from the rest is their ability to quickly respond to the needs of their customers. Every time I contacted support with a feature that I really needed, they were able to enhance their offerings to accommodate me. For example, I needed the ability to initiate a session with updated TLS settings (regardless of the browser/OS default settings) so I could run automated tests in legacy browsers. In less than two weeks, the team had added this enhancement for me. 

    Another great thing about CrossBrowserTesting is I can quickly access sessions and interact with the browser with virtually no lag time. CrossBrowserTesting recently introduced a WebRTC option which speeds up the experience even further. With other cloud testing tools, I have experienced lag times and inconsistencies (in regard to spinning up a new session). I have very rarely had issues with CrossBrowserTesting in this regard. If there are any issues, the support team responds immediately. There are always honest and forthcoming about what caused the problem and how they are fixing it.

    What needs improvement?

    The "Getting Started" documentation for Selenium testing could be improved. I was able to figure it out fairly easily, but I imagine some people might have trouble.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    One to three years.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    No issues.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    No issues.

    How are customer service and technical support?

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

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    We previously used Sauce Labs. They were too expensive and their support team was always opaque in their answers to our questions.

    What about the implementation team?

    We did the implementation in-house.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    I tried Sauce Labs and BrowserStack.

    Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer:
    ITCS user
    Software QA Tester at INXPO
    Real User
    Increased the speed of our regression testing

    What is our primary use case?

    We are using this feature to run our application in all the updated browsers popularly used.       

    How has it helped my organization?

    It has increased the speed of our regression testing.                                      

    What is most valuable?

    Cross browser testing Live test Video recording of the script running in a cloud server.

    What needs improvement?

    There should be more detailed training on CrossBrowserTesting.                                

    For how long have I used the solution?

    Still implementing.

    What is our primary use case?

    We are using this feature to run our application in all the updated browsers popularly used.       

    How has it helped my organization?

    It has increased the speed of our regression testing.                                      

    What is most valuable?

    • Cross browser testing
    • Live test
    • Video recording of the script running in a cloud server.

    What needs improvement?

    There should be more detailed training on CrossBrowserTesting.                                

    For how long have I used the solution?

    Still implementing.
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    ITCS user
    Chief Technology Officer at Trueborn Publishing
    Real User
    The ability to replay sessions is valuable for tracking down issues

    Pros and Cons

    • "The ability to replay sessions is valuable for tracking down issues."
    • "Selenium Grid allows testing multiple platforms to insure functionality for most users."
    • "A wider range of physical devices with more browser versions in the Selenium Grid would be great to insure users with out-of-date devices are able to interact with our sites."

    What is our primary use case?

    Manual and automated (Selenium) continuous testing of development and production websites to protect against broken code deployments.

    How has it helped my organization?

    • We no longer need to have a full QA team.
    • Testing is more quickly and reliably reproduced. 
    • Scheduled daily tests assist in catching any bugs which fall through the cracks and make it to the production environment.

    What is most valuable?

    • Selenium Grid allows testing multiple platforms to insure functionality for most users.
    • The ability to replay sessions is valuable for tracking down issues.

    What needs improvement?

    A wider range of physical devices with more browser versions in the Selenium Grid would be great to insure users with out-of-date devices are able to interact with our sites.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    Less than one year.
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    ITCS user
    Senior Front-End Developer at Beaconfire RedEngine
    Real User
    Made it easier to troubleshoot issues across devices when we do not have actual access to them

    Pros and Cons

    • "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."
    • "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 must acknowledge that the customer support has been A++ when I have run into problems."
    • "I have experienced some lagging issues, and it does not seem like all of the testing environments are configured the same."

    What is our primary use case?

    We primarily use CrossBrowserTesting to troubleshoot front-end issues in various browsers and devices.

    How has it helped my organization?

    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.

    What is most valuable?

    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.

    What needs improvement?

    I have experienced some lagging issues, and it does not seem like all of the testing environments are configured the same. For example, I have had to figure out how to get to Safari or whatever program I needed. If these issues were resolved, it would be a huge improvement. 

    For how long have I used the solution?

    One to three years.

    How is customer service and technical support?

    I must acknowledge that the customer support has been A++ when I have run into problems.

    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    ITCS user
    Test Automation Consultant at Equiniti
    Consultant
    It has resulted in the ability to broaden the scope of tests. I sometimes still experience lag.

    Pros and Cons

    • "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."
    • "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."

    What is our primary use case?

    My primary use for this product revolves around simulating various mobile and tablet responses to company web apps on an internal FT environment.

    How has it helped my organization?

    Initially what attracted us to the product was that it was a lot faster than what we previously used to simulate our tests. Aside from speeding up our processes, it also allowed us to tie in our automated test scenarios and integrate our reporting tools to make the entire process efficient and hassle free. This helped FT past our quality gates and confidently deliver our products past and on-time.

    What is most valuable?

    I am a big fan of the clean, uncluttered layout of the site on landing as well as the aids given to you when testing mobile products, especially the keyboard posting tools which negate tapping out my individual data entries. The extensive range of products available to simulate is also something I have come to appreciate as it has resulted in an ability to broaden the scope of our tests (something no FT tester should sneer at).

    What needs improvement?

    Elements of 'real' mobile/tablet testing could be sped up, as I still sometimes experience lag, which no one loves.

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

    For how long have I used the solution?

    Less than one year.
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.