Qt Squish Reviews

Our main test case is to automate the entire thing either to CI/CD tools. I have looked for a lot of tools on this, but we used to encounter one problem or the other. But with Squish, I didn't get many problems, and this is a straightforward procedure. One more use case is we will be using a lot of data like Database, CSV, TSV and so on. So, Squish data-driven testing is very powerful and easy.

Now we have completely automated the Squish runs using CI tools and Squish is not at all getting stuck or creating any problem. Squish is running smoothly on these tools without any problem. Squish is very good in data-driven testing when we have bulk data.

• Its powerful engine for record and replay of test cases
• It has a vast number of plugins for integrating with multiple tools.
• Squish tool documentation is so clear that each and every step is explained using some screenshots which will be helpful for new users and they can do everything.

Till now I have not noticed anything that needs improvement. I believe Squish is going at a great pace and in a good way. Squish is lagging in handling swing objects, but I believe Squish will overcome this shortly. Moreover, we don't concentrate on swing objects that's why I am not mentioning it as an important thing.

I have used some other tools, but when compared I feel Squish has very good potential.

Setup is straightforward.

Licensing is of two types, i.e., named and group license.

Yes. But I can't reveal the names of the tools.

Best tool, and a must-try tool for everyone.

Squish is very good in distributed batch testing. It allows to execute sets of script or batches and review the detailed logging and execution of results. Even we can use the test scripts for multiple test cases, i.e., global scripts which will be very useful for one who often uses the same script.

It has eliminated the back-to-back work of writing the scripts again. I would just be calling a function or file for reusing. Squish has got some good wide range of plugins available to integrate with multiple tools. With Squish, we can do remote testing which is very easy and straightforward.

Its remote testing capabilities are very good and powerful. Squish reusability of scripts is an easy and good feature. Squish data-driven testing is very powerful and we can easily check for bulk and huge data without any issues.

Not much as of now. Squish is going in a good direction and if I feel any difficulty or anything needed to be improved, I will let you know.

We previously used an open source tool.

Setup is straightforward, and pricing is medium.

Licensing is of two types:

• Named license
• Group license.

Squish was my first tool to evaluate and I felt Squish met our requirements.

It supports many platforms, which helps in getting automation solutions for most of the complex UI products.

It has helped for building automation frameworks for multiple products and also have used the tool for cross platform products like integrating Qt and web based automation.

It still requires better solutions for object identification and an enhancement to identify all the objects of the AUT before building the object map.

I've been using it for three years.

There have been no issues with the deployment.

There have no issues with the stability.

There have been no issues scaling it.

It's 7/0 - they're good a providing fixes and patches, but the video support is expensive.

We switched to frogLogic Squish because it supports multiple scripting languages.

The initial set-up is very straightforward. Complexity lies in integrating the squish binaries with QT code

The only hindrance of using it for multiple platforms or languages is it comes with different licenses for each flavour.

It's an easy to learn tool. And it has all the UI automation solutions. Can be easily integrated with applications like ALM.

• We used it for two projects, one was developed using smart GWT toolkit and other used flex
• Locators kept changing in GWT for every build
• For flex all the other solutions required the code to be build using custom parameters and libraries
• Froglogic provided us a solution which supported both the platforms, and no need to build code with vendor provided custom libraries

• Ease of use
• Integration with Rational Quality Manager
• Support for wide range of tool kits (HTML, GWT, Smart GWT, Flex)
• Tech Support of Froglogic is awesome, you talk/chat/mail directly to the designers/developers of the product.

• Features like recovery scenarios can be added as an improvement
• Reporting can be improved.

It worked great, did parallel executions, and distributed executions.

Nope

Customer Service:

10/10

Technical Support:

10/10

We were using HP QTP, before selecting squish we did a POC on TestComplete and some other vendor tools. Cost and non availability of Support for new tool kits were the reason we moved to Squish.

It is a simple tool. Anyone with a fair background in automation tools can achieve setup and start creating suites in no time.

Licence servers were implemented by the vendor team. Implementation, understanding the tool, creating proof of concept was done by me.

Stable automation suites.

All combined, we had a total of 900 scripts divided into different regression suites which we ran couple of times every week for regression on development and pre prod environments.

Execution was triggered from Rational Quality Manager and scripts executed on three of our local machines running Squish adapter.

It definitely reduced the overall testing time.

HP QTP

TestComplete

Stable automation suites, it is cheaper than most of other vendor automation tools, it supports wide range of tool-kits, even embedded solutions, one tool for all your products. The tool itself comes with a simple help, just go through it. If you still face issues, drop a mail to support and all your issues will disappear.

The ability to go through a test sequence and have Squish record the steps and verify the expected results. Then the sequence is saved and a test can be run quickly to see if any test is violated.

Having any test system, especially Squish, dictates a philosophy of testing that organizes one's outlook into a viable manor of testing. Our previous, haphazard approach to testing was not effective. Using Squish has led us into an organized mode of testing.

We had means of verifying that a client record was properly defined, but we did not test to see that all of the information for that client was removed if and when the client was deleted. The Squish discipline led us into resolving this discrepancy.

NetBeans is a Java Integrated Development Environment (IDE) particularly well suited for Graphics User Interface (GUI) development. It allows a number of GUI features such as Text Field to be defined and positioned in a GUI window. When they are first placed in the window they are given generic names such as "textfield1". Then the developer is allowed to change the name of the feature to, e.g. "ClientName", which is easier to remember the association with a program object.

When Squish is running it allows the developer to place restrictions on the contents of GUI features in order to verify correct functioning of the GUI program. These are mostly referred to by the generic name rather than to an assigned proper feature name. This requires the Squish user to either keep a cross reference list of feature names for each GUI window or to try to discern the proper feature from its contents. It would make the work of the Squish user easier and quicker if Squish would display the proper feature names, when assigned.

We have used Squish for about 9 months.

No issues in deployment.

Squish was found to be very stable, no crashes.

We did not have an issue with scalability.

Customer Service was always timely responsive and competent

I did not have an issue with technical support.

This is our first experience with test automation. We knew that what we were doing did not work. Squish is a rational approach to testing of software.

No problem in initial setup. The document ion is well prepared. But one has to realize that testing of a software system, especially a GUI, is a difficult issue. But the results of not adequate testing is a nightmare. So effort in the preparation of testing methods is well spent.

We prepared our testing system in-house.

We are a charitable organization. Our ROI is infinite.

We have found Froglogic to be a very equitable organization to deal with.

We did not find another option that had the parameter that we were looking for.

I believe that testing of software systems (especially GUI) is a difficult issue--some people believe that if the software is written correctly you don't have to worry about it. I believe that is true, but that software is never written correctly at first. There are errors in coding. There are errors in the specifications. There are changes that are necessitated as the system is placed into use. Testing to verify that the system is performing as all expect it to perform is a huge task, similar to the original coding of the system. My advice is to take software verification very seriously.

One of the most valuable features is the auto-completion of the code while you register your actions/clicks inside the application under test.

The most important part is that it allows me to create black box tests faster and easier. Along with it's features for apps written in C++ QT, gives me even some inside about the code of the application under test.

The most complete way of testing is on several OS's, even platforms. Here, the solution provided by Squish, trough several python script files, could be simplified in such a way, so that even black box testers could manage it easy. At the moment, you need to have a basic knowledge about Python and programming so you can master it and use it.

I've used it for two years.

There were no issues with the deployment.

There have been no issues with the stability.

There have been no issues with the scalability.

I had several emails exchanges with the Squish support department. They know their product, and indeed they can provide solutions for your problems. Appeal to them with confidence.

I didn't use any other solution. Some other colleagues did an evaluation of several tools, and this was the closest to our needs.

Initial set-up is quite easy, because their package comes in the form of a binary for Windows. Now, after using it for quite a while, it seems logical and quite easy.

I need to give a minus to the the product, because the technical documentation, again, is not easy to understand if you aren't at least a basic programmer. Indeed, Squish sustains sessions of on-line training, that can really help a beginner, but still, you also need to have a minimum level of principles about programming.

This product was already implemented at a basic level, when I started using it.

Yes, other found solution was the one provided by Smart Bear. But we choose Squish, because it's more flexible and intuitive.

Some of you may find the Squish product easy to use, some of you may find it hard. I think that what's important in the the end is that the used tool to allow you to obtain the wanted result. This product, until now, allowed me to do this.

• Object Map & Object Identification Tools - This feature simplifies test creation, test maintenance and troubleshooting. With this feature I can produce stable test scripts
• Powerful and intuitive Integrated Development Environment (IDE) - I use this IDE daily for creating new tests, debugging tests and running tests. Squish IDE has been very easy to use.

I have used froglogic Squish mostly for regression testing. Automated regression tests are run nightly and this helps us to find regression bugs quickly. The use of Squish also reduces test execution time.

Recording tests with Squish IDE creates quite ugly code and it is very difficult to maintain tests that have been recorded. That is one reason why I haven’t used Recording and Playpack feature at all.

I haven't encountered any issues with deployment.

I haven't encountered any stability issues.

It's scaled as needed for us.

Be patient and study product. Use the scripting language which is most familiar to you. Don’t hesitate to connect Squish customer support.

The most valuable feature is python compatibility.

Stable automation framework with it's own object library enabled us to move all of the tests to a Continuous Integration farm.

I like it how it is, but it's not cheap.

I've used it for two years, starting with v4.

There were no issues with deployment.

There were no issues with the stability.

There were no issues with the scalability.

Great ! It is not cheap, but they are quick in providing you assistance, creating a patch or noting a feature request.

Great! It is not cheap, but they are quick in providing you assistance, creating a patch or noting a feature request.

Not really, there aren't many automation tools available for OS X.

Initial set-up of product it self is easy, but there was a bit sweat to make it working with our product and setting up PoC. Froglogic Technical support played a great role in helping us to setup PoC

We implemented with team working on project where we applied the automation tool. It wasn't difficult but patience was required.

The ROI can be seen in reducing the need for two automation engineers and machines used locally prior to moving all of tests to CI farm.

This is what you would like if you are looking for for continues integration and continues delivery, a must have tool for Agile process.

Rich availability to recognize Qt controls – other tools do not provide such support – it was most priority. Also picture verification with masks/threshold – because our AUT has 3D graphics.

We were able to automate testing process for a big project, otherwise we have to lost such ability.

I used it for two years, then I transferred my knowledge with the tool to other project members.

Sometimes, I had problems, but their support team resolved almost of them in short time.

It high rate as they really do their best. For example, they sent me a new package with fixed build within a two to four hours.

I have used HP QTP, Rational Robot, MS VS Coded UI Test, and Selenium.

It’s quite easy – unzip, some settings and go ahead.

I implemented in-house solution that based-on my experience, approaches. Sometimes I used vendor team’s help as a snipped.

I did not calculate the exact ROI, but within half a year automated test coverage was about 50% - it’s а good value

If you are looking for simple, not expensive, with nice support and for Qt-application tool – I think, it’s the best one. The tool provides a few script programming languages for selection.

The most important thing with an automated GUI testing tool is the ability to quickly and accurately identify the UI components you want to script up.

Squish, after evaluating quite a few alternatives, was the best at doing this (we have a C#/WPF application).

Another feature, which has been the best for us, is the fact that once UI components are mapped, all testing can be performed via scripting languages.

When I was working as a developer in test, I wrote an entire GUI testing framework in JavaScript which was possible because of Squish’s ability to map the UI components accurately.

Squish was also easily integrated into our CI system (TeamCity). It had native support for TeamCity and allowed a Squish build step to be created that can run all, or a selection of automated tests. So now, when we have a successful build, all our UI tests are ran on the products which gives product management and the team greater confidence.

My company began investigating automated GUI testing because it was something that we did not do at all and the manual testing overhead meant that we were spending more and more time regression testing our products prior to a release.

Now we are using Squish to automate our user stories as they are implemented, therefore removing the need for a regression phase at the end of a release. This frees up our QA team to perform more exploratory testing instead of repeating regression scripts.

The only criticism I have is the IDE needed a bit of polish in version 5.2 (this may have been fixed in the latest versions). For example, I had a few occasions where Squish would fail to hit breakpoints. An application restart would fix this however.

I've used it for approximately 12 months.

Customer service at froglogic is very good. They answered most support emails within about an hour. They were also happy to provide engineering builds if they had a fix to a problem that was not in a released version yet. They also make themselves very available if you need a call with a representative to explain new features etc.

This was our first UI automation tool but we did evaluate others. We chose Squish because of its scripting ability, instead of just recording a test. Also it was the best tool for UI component identification in our product.

Installation is via a self-extracting exe. Getting up and running is very simple, start the IDE, pick your scripting language, point the Application Under Test at your products .exe file and you can start working.  For our build agents, installation is the same and the TeamCity integration handled the set-up.

We implemented in-house. No problems at all in getting our workflow up and running. Any problems that may be encountered will be diligently handled by Frog Logic support.

The biggest ROI is the time that we got back from our QA team because they didn’t have to manually regression test our product every release. They can now concentrate on exploratory testing and doing what a QA engineer should be doing, not just following manual test scripts.

It also means that, because we no longer require a regression phase in a release cycle, we are releasable at any time in the true agile sense. As long as our build system is green, we’re good to go.

For licencing, we purchased an unlimited licence that can be used on as many machines as we like with no restrictions.