Find out in this report how the two Test Automation Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
For the part that has been automated in Qt, not everything is suitable for automation.
Sometimes, the documentation is not readable, being too long or too detailed and not connected to my problem.
With one license, just one user or one test scenario can be run at a time.
If you want to run it for different versions of the software, then you need the Qt version of Java.
Additionally, in Visual Studio Code, we have an agent mode for GitHub Copilot, which is very helpful in testing or development phases, while Visual Studio's GitHub Copilot is a bit tricky and sometimes does not provide my desired output.
The product needs contextual help integrated within its interface.
Sometimes, the library version is not compatible with other libraries, causing errors in my application.
For the developer license, it is about $5200 a year.
The price is expensive.
For the parts that have been automated in Qt, not everything is suitable for automation.
It supports cross-platform functionality.
Visual Studio Test Professional is highly valuable because it provides extensive extensions and plugins that assist in measuring code quality.
We have a retrospective in our auto projects that we are using frequently to get lessons learned, what went well, and what is going wrong.
| Product | Market Share (%) |
|---|---|
| Qt Squish | 3.0% |
| Tricentis Tosca | 15.3% |
| OpenText Functional Testing | 7.1% |
| Other | 74.6% |
| Product | Market Share (%) |
|---|---|
| Visual Studio Test Professional | 1.2% |
| Tricentis Tosca | 14.2% |
| BrowserStack | 8.1% |
| Other | 76.5% |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 10 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 2 |
| Large Enterprise | 9 |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 15 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 14 |
| Large Enterprise | 24 |
Take the complexity out of testing graphical user interfaces (GUIs) and human-machine interfaces (HMIs) – even in the face of product evolution and safety-critical applications.
We monitor all Test Automation 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.
