BrowserStack Reviews

We use BrowserStack for testing on different platforms. It's a platform that allows us to test on different devices and platforms. We're using it as a regression tool and for testing on different devices.

We have some requests from our users telling us that something's not working with their device and it's easy to find the bug if the user is going to provide us the OS version and the device that they have. We can go to the specific device and OS version and check it out on our end. Without BrowserStack, it could be difficult to do.

BrowserStack has lots of devices to choose from.

Sometimes BrowserStack is really slow and devices are not loading. it is really annoying and that's why we bought several newer devices because sometimes it's affecting us a lot.

There are times when the exact device does not exist with a specific iOS within BrowserStack. We're fully moving to iOS 15 and there are not many devices available with iOS 15. Those that are available are not available with other OS versions here.

It's good to have a custom setup but I understand that the testing starts with everything cleared, cookies, and incognito mode. In order to faster go through the SaaS process, it's better to have something with preset, such as when you visit the webpage on a certain date. This way, the testing is going to go faster for us. We would use it more extensively.

There are times when you're not clicking the right spot in your browser, such as the back button, and instead of using one within the browser window. We're testing a browser inside the browser and it could lead to some glitches, even though this is my mistake. I know it's my error. However, the user experience of the browser inside another browser could be improved. They could disable certain buttons or allow us to disable them.

I have used BrowserStack within the last 12 months.

There have been some stability issues.

We have plans to increase the usage of BrowserStack for visual testing in the future.

I have not used the support because I thought none of the bugs were experiencing would be something that could be fixed quickly.

We don't have the native BrowserStack application. We use the web application.  

We have evaluated Sauce Labs and the devices run faster but we most likely will still stick with BrowserStack. We are looking at moving to a different platform.

I would recommend others who want to use BrowserStack to see if they can receive a promotion period, at no cost, and test it out.

I rate BrowserStack an eight out of ten.

Approximately a year ago I would rate BrowserStack a six or seven out of ten because it was very buggy.

We are using BrowserStack for several use cases. In our first use case, we have automated testing on the server. When you have automated testing, it uses your local browsers and BrowserStack provides the ability to integrate it with your code. Instead of using your local browsers for executing the code, it'll be executed remotely, and the integration is very easy.

Our second use case was for cross-browser testing for the same automation with the script that we have. 

In the third use case, we were having different platforms. In some of the test cases, we were using a different browser or a combination of a different browser and the different OSs that we have. For example, we had the combination of Windows with IE, and Apple and Mac, with Safari. We did tests on many devices, such as iPhone and iPad. All the devices are available. Once we have integrated it, we were easily able to switch our testing to any of the other devices that we wanted.

The solution has many benefits, we are not worried about maintaining devices locally in our organization. This is one of the biggest benefits. Any device that is new in the market, or any phone or OS that is launched the new version is always available. We are never worried about having access to those. In the real world, you have to buy those new devices and you have to go through a lot of processes to maintain them.

Mmaintaining the devices is the largest task. All the devices have to be checked physically for many things, such as charging. While someone else might need a device but not be able to have access when it is a physical device, there are limitations. With virtual devices, everyone can have access right away, they can log in and start using the device.

The main core concept behind this product is, it takes the overhead of maintaining all of your devices or particular computers. It continuously adds the latest devices that are coming into the market. 

You are able to can record all of your executions session. It's easy to keep track of what you have executed. The screenshots are available.

There are a lot of unique features. For example, when you want to configure the bandwidth of your internet, or if you want to test something with the low bandwidth of your internet, such as how your features are working in the low band to allow configuration of your VPN. Some websites only can be accessed from the UK and if you want to mimic the scenario where the person from the UK is accessing the site, you can do that. Geographical mimicking is also available.

While I was testing I was not 100% sure a that was properly mimicking the browsers or not. We had some issues with a browser, and the reason was the browser itself does not provide any support. If the local system does not provide any support, I think this was the problem. There should be better integration with other solutions, such as JIRA.

All the testing that I do is functional testing, such as UI testing is for mobile. I'm not sure whether it is allowing for desktop testing or not, but if it does not, they should add it for various desktop applications as well for us to have remote access.

I have been using BrowserStack for approximately one and a half years.

The performance of the solution is good. We have not faced any issues. All of the mobile devices or and different OSs have been working well.

The solution is scalable. You have access to all the latest devices and OSs needed. You can increase the number of users using the solution by purchasing more licenses.

We have a team of approximately 35 people, and we all are using the solution.

We do not use this solution on a daily basis but when there is a particular project our teams will use it on a daily basis for testing.

Initially, when we were configuring the automation, we had some issues that we had to contact the technical team. The communication was through email. They do not have a large team of support agents and it would appear that they are still establishing their team.

We have previously used Blisk, which is a similar solution to BrowserStack. It's a simulator for different devices you might have.

Blisk had a limited amount of devices to use. It is a simulator, it is difficult to perform tests with it. It is not a virtual system causing it to have limitations. You can have your application in different sizes and in different devices. The size of the UI will be changed according to the device, not any configuration.

When I am using BrowserStack in the VA systems and if I selected an Apple device the code and configuration will be that of an Apple device.

There is no installation process for BrowserStack, it is a SaaS. However, the process to use the service is very straightforward. You need to choose which device and browser you want and you can start right straight away. Within two or three-step, you can start your application remotely.

There is no maintenance required.

There are different licenses available that can be customized. You can select the features that you want only to use which can be a cost-benefit.

We have licenses to use this solution and it is on a per-user basis. It is a bit expensive compared to other tools are the market.

I would advise those wanting to use the solution to make sure they know their specific requirements and intended usage before purchasing a license. You do not want to purchase features you do not want to use. Use the free version first and then once you understand the solution you can purchase it.

I rate BrowserStack a seven out of ten.

We were testing it as a user interface on various systems which we manage.

It just added some flexibility. There was nothing that improved our coding standards, etc. because all of our UIs were functional before we tried it. 

If you ask me feature-wise, I don't think I have tested all the features there—around 40 to 60 percent— nor I was interested in doing do that because the trial was so short. However, there were a few devices that we did not want to procure but we found them within BrowserStack architecture when we tried it out. More than a feature, it was the hardware support that we were able to get through the interfaces. This helped us address a very rare requirement that had come up within our end customer's stack.

Adding better integration with frameworks, particularly testing frameworks like Robot, would be of more value to customers and make their jobs easier.

I only used it for about two weeks during a 14-day trial period about four or five months ago. 

This at least gave us good stability and the results that we saw were quite reasonable enough.

It was easy enough. Because I come from an IT background and have done deployments of many solutions, it was quite simple. It didn't take more than 10-15 minutes on that day.

I would rate BrowserStack a seven out of ten. 

A lot of times we use BrowserStack because we provide QA services to our clients as part of a bigger solution. We do software consulting. We use it to test across mobile devices — actual mobile devices — so that we do not have to maintain our own collection of devices. Trying to do that would be just crazy for us because there are so many devices and so many potential combinations. We test against different combinations of operating systems, browsers, and versions of browsers. For example, we continue to test IE 11, even though that is painful for a lot of our development team. Unfortunately, we still have to support it for a lot of clients. We use BrowserStack for cross-browser testing to assure compatibility.  

It allows us to test our development against a huge range of product combinations that we could not realistically maintain in house. It really adds to our core capabilities.   

Just the ability to test across devices is probably the most valuable feature. For example, a website that we might be building out has to be responsive. Our initial design may work on some devices, but then in testing with BrowserStack we find that it does not work on all of them. So it reveals what we need to include in recommendations for our clients. From a practical standpoint, that could be letting them know what devices we might want to support or not support any longer.  

The other thing that we had to do — because some clients have their test environment secured — is to use the product's local testing abilities as a workaround. That feature lets you test web and mobile apps without hosting them on publicly. To be able to do that and provide the workaround is a pretty good feature.  

Sometimes connectivity can be a problem. We will be in the middle of testing and we will lose connectivity sometimes. That is the biggest issue that I have seen. That is a stability issue within BrowserStack, not an issue with services.  

I have thought about features I would like to see included in the next release of the BrowserStack. I do not know if it is even possible to support this or not. Being able to test GPS within applications would be useful for us. What I mean by that is being able to do real-time testing based on your location. I do not know if BrowserStack could support that in emulations in a future release. Being able to emulate GPS positions during testing would be valuable for what we do and the clients we serve. For example, if we are doing something and need to do QA for a rideshare or delivery service the GPS testing would come into play.  

I have been dealing with BrowserStack for about four years.  

Overall, I think the stability is good. It is a tried and true product. I think they are the leader in this category of products. Part of it is the price. The other part of the reason they are leading is because of the performance. We have had some issues with the connectivity, which is a stability problem, but it is not generally an issue.  

I believe this product is quite scalable. One thing we have not done with our version of BrowserStack is to use it for automated testing yet. Because we are using a client's solution for a particular job I am working on, we are going to be using Perfecto in that case. Both Perfecto and BrowserStack offer the ability to perform automated testing across devices. So that is something we are definitely going to be checking into with some interest in the near future and that is another way to scale usage.  

Our company has a lot of different clients. With the particular one that I am assigned to, we are going to be building additional teams if everything goes well. It is a large client, or it has the potential to be a very large client. With that in mind, we are looking to add more teams and that would include using additional QA resources. As we build that up right now, we are willing to make important decisions. What we are using will need to be scalable when we add more users. Whatever we need to do over the next two or three years to meet those demands is what we are going to do.  

So far when I have had an issue, I have been able to go into BrowserStack's online documentation resource and find the answers pretty clearly. Because of that, I have not had to contact tech support. I think their knowledge base is pretty extensive.  

The initial setup is pretty straightforward. It is pretty easy to follow the product guides and set it up properly. 

They have different pricing plans for BrowserStack. We are looking to grow our presence with a particular client quite a bit. With that in mind, we are going to be adding a lot more teams and users so we looked into competitive pricing. For BrowserStack, the pricing for 25 users is similar to the pricing for 10 users on Perfecto. At the end of the day, our cost per user would be significantly higher using Perfecto versus BrowserStack. I can not say what the exact price is. BrowserStack is an expensive solution as well, but it is certainly a more cost-effective solution than competing products. The price per user license is lower. At least that is what we are seeing.  

We have not actually done it yet but we are going to be working in a situation where a client already has Perfecto and we will be using that for testing for a product. It will be a great opportunity to check into the product differences.  

My advice to anyone looking into BrowserStack and products like it is to really do some research into the products you want to use. Our company looked to our team of QA personnel to evaluate other products. At the end of the day, they came back and said that most of the competing products in the category did not meet all the needs we have. BrowserStack continues to be the leader as far as meeting the needs of our QA team.  

During the research, we looked for reports on the review sites, the recommendations people were making, and whatever feedback we could find from real users. Certainly, it is important for us to try and be exhaustive in researching before we make any recommendation and the investment that goes along with committing to a product. We have to make sure the product is going to absolutely meet our needs. We do not want to waste time picking the wrong product for the job.  

From the research that we did, I was looking to see the overall percentages of recommendations. I think BrowserStack showed that it was more widely used across the industry than Perfecto. I think they are both similar offerings, but BrowserStack systems just seem to be the clear, popular choice. A lot of that is probably just that their pricing model is more favorable.  

On a scale from one to ten (where one is the worst and ten is the best), I would rate the BrowserStack as probably a seven-out-of-ten.  

Our primary use case is for browser testing.

The most valuable features are the variety of tools available.

Stability is a feature that needs to be improved. Some of the issues found in BrowserStack are not as consistent as desired. I would like to see clearer visibility.

I have been using BrowserStack for one year.

I would rate BrowserStack a seven on a scale of one to ten.

Our primary use case for the solution is working on web applications, and there are also mobile, Android and IOS in BrowserStack. So, we have it in different languages and execute the parallel execution and migration. So, when executing more than 500 cases for the regularization pack, we get high success ratings for internal use.

We find the application testing features valuable.

We had some execution issues, and you would like to move to the Sauce Labs. We are based out of India and need 100% bandwidth for testing. So, on some days, we have low bandwidth, and on other days a high bandwidth. So network issues could be improved to support our execution.

We have been using the solution for approximately two years.

The solution is stable, and we have not had any issues with it.

The solution is scalable. I rate it a seven out of ten. Approximately 20 users are utilizing the solution.

We have had a good experience with customer service and support. The study is minimal, and when we have issues like a parallel solution failing, we reach out to the support team, and within two days, they respond to us. Additionally, they can connect the demos and solve them and teach us how to use BrowserStack for our web or mobile applications. I rate the customer service and support team an eight out of ten.

Positive

I was not involved in the initial setup, but maintenance of the solution is easy.

I rate the solution a seven out of ten. The solution is good but is not fully developed and can be improved by enhancing its network connections to avoid network issues. I recommend the solution to users considering it and advise them to understand their use case first and how to utilize the solution.

We're building two products at the same time. We're building web pages and building Android and iOS applications. After the building stage, we're going to translate it to automation. But right now, we're testing and proving tools to understand which one will work best in the future.

I like that it offers full device capability.

Customer support could be better. We tried to implement and explore this product with the vendor or reseller's help, but we haven't had any good response about the product.

The initial setup and configuration of this product are easy.

The price is fine.

Sauce Labs and BrowserStack are very similar

On a scale from one to ten, I would give BrowserStack a nine.

We switched to BrowserStack because we didn't have enough devices so we moved to a cloud-based solution. 

I would like for there to be more integration with BrowserStack and other platforms. One of our clients had Ranorex which is a solution that has a problem with automation on regional devices. It also provides record and play functionalities. Our client proposed integration with BrowserStack but it's not available. I would like for both web applications to be linked. There should be a solution for mobile-based automation. 

It's very stable. 

I have contacted technical support two or three times. They are good but I don't understand the hierarchy. They initially answer with some documentation and then they escalate it. There should be the option to schedule a call with them because people can't always find the solution through the documentation. I would like for them to have direct calls with their clients. 

The setup was quite simple. The website easily explains how to set it up and if you want to integrate it with BPM tools there are online simple step tutorials. 

The deployment takes around two weeks. 

For small scale projects with 200-500 test cases involved, it is costly. But if it's a large project then it is much cheaper than purchasing real devices. 

I would rate it a nine out of ten considering how easy it is to set up. 

They should improve the query resolution. 

It is a good tool. We have multiple products that use it for automation. 

The most valuable feature was that it was very easy to connect to our web-application without much additional configuration. So we could do very quick checks to get fast feedback.

It helped us a lot to accomplish our testing related goals and helped to provide better service to our customer, but I don’t think that it changed our organization functioning that much.

I would like application performance improvement to be better as, for me, it looked a bit slow. For example, loading one page sometime took 10-15 seconds.

Maybe about a year. We didn’t use it permanently, but from time to time when we needed to check how does UI look in different browsers.

There were no issues with the deployment.

There have been no issues with the stability.

There have been no issues with the scalability.

The application was very self-explanatory so I didn’t have to ask for technical support.

This was recommended and tried first by my colleague. I may have used some different solutions previously but I don’t recall them.

There was no set-up as it is web application. You just open the page and connect it to our server.

This was done by my colleague, I just got a user account from him.

We needed to test our application in different browsers and BrowserStack had all the configurations we needed. There were some small issues though, but they haven’t prevented us from using the product. I think that product was easy to use. It was fast to start with it and didn’t need any additional technical knowledge.

The product support for different OS and mobile devices is awesome. Most importantly, it has support for Automation of web application designed with Selenium and Java. With few configuration set up , we can able to execute automation scripts without any difficulty.

We are in the process of execution of our Automation scripts on different OS and devices. BrowserStack has given us an opportunity to validate on different mobile devices versions without much difficulty.

Though, it has great build in functions and support , we found there is a room for improvement mainly.

The real challenges I noticed when I ran few tests with Test NG :

• Unable to see the remote view while testing on real iOS devices - when we run the automation scripts, we do not see the real execution on mobile devices in a snapshot view but at the moment we only see text and visual logs for these devices.
• File upload to run tests on mobile devices (real iOS devices, iOS simulators (iPhoneDriver) - upload a local file from local machine while executing the test. This functionality is only supported on the desktop browsers.
• BrowserStack does not support file upload for automation - the WebDriver used to run tests on mobile devices (real iOS devices in beta (Appium), iOS simulators (iPhoneDriver) and Android emulators (AndroidDriver)) do not support this feature. Thus, we are not be able to test file uploads on mobile devices.

I would advise you to try the product using the trial version and validate your functionality with different devices to check the set-up time, stability and in built functions support.