I use the BrowserStack test manager to create or import tests scenarios, and the integration with jira tasks so I can easely keep track of my activities importing the test cases that I will run for the specific task and keep all the evidences organized. I also use App Live to test ipa and apk applications using the devices available, which is very useful, because we can run the tests in different resolutions and develop the apps with a more accurate UI. I use the runner for regression tests and I can easely filter the tests cases that are required for the next release. The App Automate tool is used for running a couple of tests that demands a lot of time and effort if done manually, so I find it very useful to keep track of the health of our applications.
Pros
BrowserStack Test-manager is user friendly and very easy to import gherkin files.
There are a huge variety of devices for both iOS and Android on App Live
The reports are very accurate and useful for keeping track of the health of our apps
The customer support is agile and very patient while solving the problems reported
Cons
The integration with Jira should have the option to use gherkin instead of steps
When I open the evidences that I upload to the test scenarios, the image never opens full size, so I have to download again to see it clearly.
I'm not able to upload evidence files on Test Runners created in the jira tasks.
Likelihood to Recommend
Besides the issues that I have with the Jira integration, BrowserStack works very well, there are a huge variety of devices that I can use to test on App Live, for both Android and iOS. The Test Automate tool works very well and the Test-Manager is very user friendly. I used other platforms to test our applications, and BrowserStack is by far the most complete platform for QAs that have the need for managing and execute mobile tests. It's not only useful for the QAs, but also for the developers and stakeholders that are interest in keep track of the application reports. I highly recommend it for my colleagues. I must add that the customer support is well trained and they are very agile while solving our requests.
VU
Verified User
Professional in Quality Assurance (Financial Services company, 501-1000 employees)
Use to manage the many test case scenarios. Good for seeing what is automated and what isn't. Helps divide test cases between multiple testers, compared to having a all the test cases just listed on a ticket. Can share test cases easily between tickets, resuing them and such. Overall very helpful
Pros
Managing test cases
Checking for automation coverage
Sharing test cases
Cons
Loading a case or folder inside many subfolders doesn't open those subfolders which is really annoying
Easier reporting for things like % of tests in a folder are automated
I think the template for bulk upload has some fields that are named differently or aren't used?
Likelihood to Recommend
It would be higher, but there are a couple frustrations. Such as the one I mentioned earlier. In case you can't see my earlier answers, I'll re explain. If I bookmark a test case folder, it will show all the cases in the folder, but the folder structure on the left will be all collapsed meaning I have to manually dig for the folder if I want to see it's sibling instead.
VU
Verified User
Employee in Information Technology (Financial Services company, 501-1000 employees)
We used BrowserStack to test our Enterprise Web Application, the primary public website that serves our data repository. We want to test web applications across a different set of combinations of Operating System, Browser, and Version. To ensure a seamless experience for different users. We want to automate regression testing to reduce our deployment cycle time.
Pros
Test client website on 5x more platform.
Provide a real device with features like media injection and Physical SIM testing for manual testing of a specific feature.
Automate regression suite to execute parallel on multiple device.
Provide an accessibility report for the website through automated scanning of the site using site.xml.
Cons
Integrating a low-code or no-code product is difficult to use on an on-prem network with restrictions.
Automate setup could be more seamless, with packages to integrate in existing project.
Does not support different file types for uploading. Restrictions on the type of files.
Likelihood to Recommend
Multiple real devices available for testing across different OS, platform and browsers for both website and mobile application testing. Automate help to integrate existing project and testing suite to run across different devices. This reduce testing timeline and allow us to quickly release new features to users. Also provide automated accessibility report.
VU
Verified User
Program Manager in Engineering (Capital Markets company, 1001-5000 employees)
We're running our mobile automation tests. Using remote devices we are able to have a big grid so we cover many devices, OS, screen sizes, etc.
Pros
No connection issues
Easy integration
Responsive support
Cons
The main thing that's annoying is that for every small (and sometimes elementary) functionality, we need to add money and we discover it along the way so on every step we need to pay more money. It starts to feel not professional
Likelihood to Recommend
Already explained in the previous questions - responsive support, range of devices, no connection issues and smooth integration. If you know exactly what you need in advance, every small detail and functionality, then it's ok. But, if you don't have complete, full 100% of the scope in advance, you'll find yourself adding more and more payment to allow functionalities.
Our organization use BrowerStack to stimulate our digital banking. We use this to demonstrate to our customers how that works without using any genuine data of any customers. We find it particularly useful for those elderly who are not familiar with digital devices. The software helps us a lot in promoting our products.
Pros
Showing how to use digital banking step by step
Don't have to worry about using real data
Cons
More user friendly to open accounts
Much easier to start up the application process
Provide demonstrations to first time user
Likelihood to Recommend
It is useful in phone banking application because there are so many types of phone and the software can cater for all kinds of phone.
As I have used Browserstack for mobile application development with Flutter framework, it is not as good as I expected. It is not completely friendly with Flutter framework, it may be good for the native side, like Android Java or Kotlin as the same it is very useful for UI testing for mobile applications. For compatibility, look and feel, we can test two devices simultaneously for UI. But when it comes to the website, it was really good for text, making the website more user-friendly. It also has some features for Figma, as well as design-related features. It also provides different versions of mobile for texting, but it cannot provide auto-texting like black box text random texting; otherwise, it is very useful for device compatibility.
Pros
UI testing.
Version texting.
Compatibility.
Cons
Automatic texting.
Likelihood to Recommend
1. UI texting is very good. 2. Need to improve in automatic texting without scripting. 3. Good for the website, one of the best tools. 4. Not good for a Figma designer. 5. Well if you want maybe it will be good for native side coding Java, Kotlin for UI testing, and functional testing
VU
Verified User
Analyst in Research & Development (Financial Services company, 1001-5000 employees)
Its used to test application/softwares/websites across different operating systems/devices & browsers to get you a real feedback & understanding. Which helps you to improve your apps to make it work globally.
Pros
Cloud Based Platform
Cross device & browser Testing
Performance Testing
Cons
Higher cost compare to competition
Slowness & Lagging during testing
Require High & Stable Internet
Likelihood to Recommend
Its best to use in case, you want to test apps across different browsers, devices & OS so you can focus on identify possible bugs/issues to improve and have uniform performance. Not a great success if you have slow internet connection or using an unstable network. Needless to say the pricey choice.
BrowserStack handles all of our automated testing. We also use Percy for the visual regression testing as well. We have automated tests at every step of our deployment, in acceptance, staging and production. This has really cut down on the amount of time we need to verify our application in different lifecycles
Pros
Visual Regression
Feature Test and smoke tests for regression testing
Cons
At times, the test suite fails in BrowserStack, but is fine when run on its own. There is some flakiness in it
The AI in the visual regression is not reliable enough to be useful
Likelihood to Recommend
Anything that needs to be tested in the app itself, BrowserStack can handle nicely. I have had no issues with that core functionality. However, if we need to continue testing outside of the app, say opening files or emails, then it cant handle the full end to end test.
VU
Verified User
Project Manager in Information Technology (Financial Services company, 10,001+ employees)
We used it for QA automation. And we used it for Cross browser and cross platform testing. This is used for CI/CD pipeline intergradation in our team. So, using this pipeline Intergration we can run our all test together and can record the test running if error occurred. The screen recording and remote debugging features help us easily reproduce and diagnose issues reported in specific environments.
Pros
Easily Collaboration and reporting. Like After running the test we can share recording and logs with the development team.
As the cross-browser testing, we run our test cases in chrome and edge.
We integrate this with Jenkins and test result get with logs and videos
Cons
We integrate with this Jenkins, so sometime failures logs are not much describable in Jenkin console
When run parallel test suites using TestNG and Selenium, but if the number of parallel sessions exceeds the plan limit, this queue the test
Likelihood to Recommend
As in my experience before the release we test the cross-browser testing using BrowserStack. For this we run our full test suit across Google Chrome, Firefox. Using this method will save our time setting up different environment. And this method provides videos and console logs and screenshots. Within minimum setup we can test combability of the all user browsers
VU
Verified User
Employee in Information Technology (Banking company, 201-500 employees)
We use BrowserStack to run the UI Automation test cases across on-different browsers for our Open API Product . We provide a platform to developers to create solution using Mastercard developers APIs.
Pros
Cross browser testing
Parallel executions
Recording and Detailed logs
Nice Dashboard to check required things in one place
Cons
BrowserStack can provide better Test Management tool
Integration with JIRA/Rally
Customizable Dashboard
Likelihood to Recommend
BrowserStack is well suited for remote cross browser parallel execution but it would be less appropriate for API and Database test cases.
VU
Verified User
Employee in Information Technology (Financial Services company, 10,001+ employees)
