Selenium HQ Reviews

SeleniumHQ is WebDriver-related. It is a package that we can use with any language such as Java or Python.

We use Selenium for automation purposes. For example, if we need data from a website, we write code that will extract the data automatically. If there are logins or pop-ups, the code will close them, so we can extract the data. 

When we are testing a website, we use SeleniumHQ automation testing to determine if there are any bugs.  

The most valuable feature of Selenium is how easy it is to automate. For example, often when data is needed, someone will sit and copy and paste it. What we can do with SeleniumHQ is automate it so that the data is directly extracted from the tools and libraries that we use. This saves time and is much better than copying and pasting.

There are some tiny issues with SeleniumHQ. For example, with respect to the scraping tests. Sometimes, a website will have some hidden items or blockages that inhibit us from extracting data directly. It would be beneficial if Selenium could extract that information.

The other issue is browser-related. There are small bugs causing it to break automatically. Sometimes it will close automatically. 

I have been using SeleniumHQ for a year and a half.

Stability depends on how you write the code. If you handle all conditions, there will be some surprises. Suddenly, you will have pop-ups and other conditions. 

SeleniumHQ is scalable. Anyone can use it. We have approximately 30 users of the solution. 

Customer service and support with Selenium are good. If any bugs are found and brought to their attention, they will immediately help. They provide lots of documentation as well as answers on the internet. The technical support team, themselves, will answer questions within 24 hours.

We use Python, so the initial setup of SeleniumHQ was quick and simple. You can use any browser or tools like, Chrome, Firefox, or Edge to run the automation testing. 

We are using Selenium open-source, so there is no need to purchase anything.

We evaluated other options. 

For mobile scraping, non-mobile scraping, or to test anything mobile there are more applications available on the internet, like Appium for Android, which is like Selenium for browsers, or TestComplete for iOS drivers. 

However, Selenium is particularly the best for browsers or PC, operating systems.

I would recommend this solution to anyone considering implementing it into their organization. Overall, I would rate SeleniumHQ an eight out of ten.

We mainly use HQ for UI automation and some of the main functions of test cases. We are customers of Selenium. 

The best thing about the product is that it is open-source and free, which is why we opted for it. It's also customizable which is great for us. There is a lot of online assistance available in forums and support on the Stack overflow. HQ is continually updated and supported by Selenium. You can write your own scripts without needing to depend on what's already there. The UI is automation friendly. When there's a slow network and an older application, the waves get very flaky and Selenium can handle that. Setting up and working with Chrome and Firefox is easy on Selenium.

The solution is intended for browser automation so it's not a support testing tool and there are no features. I'd like to see some flavors of test case management available that don't require any additions and there could be some improvement in the fluid-based area as well. Selenium is meant for developers but QA people cannot write test cases very easily on it. If you don't have a development background, it's tough. 

I've been using this solution for eight years. 

We had a few stability issues initially but it's very stable now.

The product is scalable. We have around 40 to 50 QA users in the company. 

We reported a few bugs on Selenium and they were resolved. The support was mediocre. Because it's open source there's not much support available.

The initial setup is easy but it requires certain development skills to set up. Without that, it's not easy. The difficulty is in creating a framework and that requires thinking about the maintainability and scalability aspects.

We went with Selenium for several reasons; it's open source and free, they provide a lot of support, and we can use Java technology which Selenium has available. Other tools generally don't provide perpetual licenses.

It's important to get hands-on experience with the program. I would also suggest getting your frame pyramid in order. You need to decide on the language you're going to use and have that programming language support in your organization and decide which other tools you're going to use. Also, think of your application and whether Selenium is the appropriate solution.  

This is the most widely used tool throughout the world in this space. It has so much support available and is a benchmark for other tools so I rate the solution eight out of 10.

The solution is for front-end testing. It is mainly a testing tool.

There is nothing I cannot do with Selenium. It's very good in terms of features.

The recent changes they've added have been positive. 

The back-end integration and backend web driver supports are great. We integrate with Jira Confluence, Bitbucket, and Jenkins. There is no issue at all.

It has great Dev tools.

The Chrome debugging protocol has been helpful.

We found the initial setup to be straightforward. 

The solution is stable.

It's quite scalable. 

This is an open-source solution that is free to use. 

It supports multiple languages. Many of my friends are working with Selenium with Python language. I am working in Java. People are working in Javascript also. Some people work in this Ruby, C#, et cetera. 

In my previous company, I was using Selenium in my MacBook Air. They could handle iOS with no problem or Windows. It supports different operating systems and multiple browsers. 

It's really not lacking in features at this time. 

We'd like to have more support for Windows applications. 

There's no in-built reporting available. They should work on their reporting functionality. 

I've used the solution for five and a half years. 

It's a pretty stable product. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

It is scalable. I have made many changes, and it is always scalable. It is adaptive, actually. Whatever I do on it, I can adjust. It is scalable.

We have maybe ten people using the solution right now.

We use it daily. 

Whenever we Google issues, we find it easy to find answers. 

We've found support to be good.

I've also used Appium in the past.

The solution offers a very easy initial setup. It's not overly complicated or difficult. Compared to Appium, for example, it's much easier. 

I'd rate the ease of implementation five out of five. 

The product is free to use and open-source. 

The framework and the language should be defined early if a new user plans to take this solution on long-term. It helps to have that figured out so you can implement it correctly. A few years back, I started with Java, however, given the choice, I would have preferred Python.

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten. 

I have led regression testing projects involving CRM, employee registration, and eCommerce. In each of these test cases, we have used the automation tool which has brought us benefits in time savings, shortening schedules, or recovering lost time - all of this leading to money savings. 

It's very useful when there are constant changes in the back-end. If the changes are constant in the source end it is not a good idea to use it. It is very important to previously evaluate the use of the tool depending on the characteristics.

The main improvement is the lower cost of regression tests. It will probably be more expensive in the first iteration (more or less 30%), however, we can save up to 40% or 50% in the next runs. 

Another benefit is that, once the test scripts have been built, it is not necessary for the person executing the test processes to be an expert, allowing resources and costs to be optimized with lower costs in human talent. 

In addition, the barrier of functional knowledge is eliminated; specialization is not necessary during the life cycle of the tests.

The main characteristic that is useful is that the tool is completely free.

Additionally, currently, you can find resources that handle the characteristics of the tool very well. 

The range of web platforms it supports is also wide, including the operating system platforms. It is possible to reuse the test scenarios that have been built in iterations after the first one or in the improvements of the systems that are part of the normal maintenance and updating that must be done periodically and that imply an investment in tests.

A great improvement could be in the user experience which is necessary as it does not have much. The use is too technical; it is not designed for the end-user. The best way to maintain the test scenarios over time should be considered. If the test scenarios are not subdivided correctly, it is very likely that maintenance will become very expensive and re-use is unlikely. This would ultimately mean that it would reflect the possible benefits in the projects and, on the contrary, the use of the solution ends up being more expensive.

I have been working with Selenium for five years.

The latest version should always be treated with care. Being open-source it can be unstable.

The scalability will depend on where the tool is installed.

Until now, I have not used the support service. Everything has been done using the documentation that is registered in the forums.

Neutral

In the past, I used a very good solution. However, it had a high cost and had to be used by more than one resource.

The initial setup can be very complex.

In my case, the initial setup was done internally.

The ROI can be between 20% to 50% in the testing process in the medium and long term. In the short term, it can be 10% or less.

As for the license, there is not much to say. It is free, however, the configuration must be done correctly or it can be very expensive.

Other options that I evaluated were TestComplete, Kathalon, and IBM.

It must be evaluated very well before being used. In my case, we implemented a front-end that facilitates the use. If you want to use it in the future I can give you some access.

We are still testing Selenium HQ.

The client is based in the U.S. They process the code checking, and we work on the script.

When we get storage or requirements for manual testing, we begin the automation once it is stabilized.

We work in the healthcare domain.

If for example, I get a diagnosis for a particular patient, it continuously changes as there are at least 100 sets of data. It's impossible to make that work for each and every build manually. The parameterization and parallelization have helped us with the inputting. 

Every week we have reviews. We have automated the stabilized areas. It has helped us to add speed to our cycles.

Data parametrization and parallelization are the most important features in any automation tool.

Speed is very important for continuous integrations and deployments. The team gets more time to focus on other new areas.

The configuration of different data sets is also very important.

With Selenium, it is an open-line, I can integrate at any time, from anywhere.

There are some network issues, as the line is not very clear.

There are some areas that need improvement. I continuously see failures in threads when it  is running in parallel. 

I find that it fails, especially when I use APM automation on the mobile side. I have experienced these issues, and since the APM is also based on the Selenium pack.

It is a challenge to locate them, or knowing the location of the unique elements on the APM application. I don't see many issues with the Web applications but there are several with the APM.

As an open-source solution, there is no dedicated support.

Extending functions on the codes would be very helpful.

I have been working with Selenium WebDriver for four to five years but in the last year, it has been working mostly on the functional testing.

There are some issues with the stability of Selenium HQ.

In terms of scalability, we don't use many distributed systems. It is for a limited number of users. We have one lead architect and three senior QAs.

We don't deal with technical support. Our clients handle that on their end, but there is no direct technical support.

I have some experience with Selenium WebDriver and Rest Assured API automation. 

In regards to mobile automation, we use Appium.

Six months ago, I work on Selenium NUnit.

Clear instructions were provided to complete the installation. It was very straightforward. There were no issues when installing this solution.

APM setups are a bit more of a challenge. It takes longer to set up APM.

There were no issues in the installation of WebDriver. From the end-to-end process to deployment, to the automation code.

We have one dedicated assigned person for continuous integration and deployment. We check in with him before we complete any code. We provide him with our test and script, and the integration is done with him present to avoid any issues.

Selenium is open-source. There are no licensing fees with Selenium.

We are currently evaluating functional testing tools, both manual and automation testing.

We are looking for codeless automation with support for codeless automation.

In my evaluations, I have seen that some are tools are lacking.

I have worked full-fledged on Selenium WebDriver along with the multi-tenancy for the JavaScript framework.

I have hands-on experience with the Selenium framework, and I also worked on, API for APA automation Currently I am working in the healthcare domain.

In my opinion, it is a complete end-to-end solution.

As of now, it's for only web APIs. It provides a complete solution. 

I don't see that it's many disadvantages, except when doing the coding. A person should have perfect coding skill sets. If they don't have a coding skillset, it's a little difficult for them to get started. 

We had completed multiple POCs to present to our clients.

It was pretty straightforward for me. I didn't experience a lot of difficulties getting into Selenium. If your framework with Selenium is good, then it gives you the correct output.

I would rate Selenium an eight out of ten.

My customer previously validated every file and it would take almost 15-20 minutes for a document. They used to randomly select and test only 100 out of the thousands, maybe 85,000, files, to pick up sampling. Each file would take around 20 to 25 minutes, so we were not able to do it manually, but with the help of Selenium, we were able to test all the files in two days. It saves a lot of time.

Selenium HQ is open source, which is one thing that I like about it. Whatever you want to find, it's already there. If you'd like to add some features, you can. You can also contribute to it. Whatever problems we face, we can go and add. It is most like Eggplant, which is a paid tool, but here we don't have to pay for anything.

In terms of what could be improved, there are some glitches with it, but whenever you report it, the open source community works on it and fixes it. There is no support here. If I say in the user community that it's not working, I have to go and check Openstack and extract questions and answers from the community. There is not any company that is supporting it that could help me. There is no particular documentation about it that can help me in a technical way. I would have to see people's user experience and see what they have done in such and such scenarios.

Sometimes we face challenges with Selenium HQ. There are third party tools that we use, for example for reading the images. They are not easy to plug in. The third party add-ons are difficult to get good configuration and do not have good support. I would like to see better integration with other products.

In the next release, I would like OCR, image recognition, to be built-in. Sometimes there are no code elements that are detectable so finding x paths is tough. Whenever there are some challenges here, we could use OCR or something similar, with good image recognition.

I have been using Selenium HQ for the last couple of months.

Selenium HQ's scalability depends on the modularity of the product. Our product was more modular. When we made the product testable for one document, we were able to test 20,000 documents with it. So the scalability was quite impressive.

We have three people in the testing team who are using it.

We are considering expanding usage. Since it has reduced the business time, there are new scenarios that other business teams were using it for. So they asked us to include those scenarios as well, reducing the time.

There is no tech support because it's open source in Selenium.

You just have to raise the bugs in the community and if someone has time, they can fix it. So it's not so quick.

The initial setup was straight forward. We don't use it in deployment, we just use Selenium for testing in our organization. The code which was deployed was tested before.

There are four developers in my team who are working on it.

It was not a Selenium deployment because the deployment was of code, and we only use Selenium for testing purposes. We did not deploy with Selenium code anywhere on production.

In terms of pricing, it is open source, so we don't have to pay anything for Selenium.

My advice to anyone considering using Selenium is that using their libraries is good but the focus should be on finding the elements. Element location is a tough part. There are plugins that are available so don't waste time creating your own locators. You can use ready-made built-in solutions that would reduce your time a lot.

On a scale of one to ten, I would give Selenium HQ a six.

We primarily use the solution as a functional testing tool.

Selenium is a freeware tool, through which I am using Java for automating our project testing and with its feature grid and a different browser, I can do the functional testing. We can automate our functional testing through a browser. It supports all types of browsers including Firefox and Chrome.

We can run multiple projects at the same time and we can design both types of framework, including data-driven or hybrid. We have got a lot of flexibility here.

It's easy to customize according to our needs. 

Now we are getting lots of extensions such as BlazeMeter, where you can record and generate the script and modify, et cetera.

The initial setup is easy.

The parallel testing in Selenium is lacking.

The latest versions are often unstable. 

There's no UI in Selenium. Beginners who want to start using it must have knowledge of Java, Python, or any programming language. If you are using a Chrome extension, that is a BlazeMeter extension, you can record and make the script, however, that is not very helpful for beginners.

The editor is based on Eclipse. It would be nice if there was some in-built UI for this.

I am leading a 20 person team where I have some junior staff and we have to set up lots of demos and training for them to be comfortable with Selenium.

Occasionally, if someone is downloading the latest version of Java, it might not align with the Selenium version. There needs to be a way for Selenium to alert you if there will be a conflict between versions. 

I've been using the solution for four years. 

The level of stability depends on the version you are referencing. For example, Version 3.1.46 is very stable, however, Version 4.0.0, the latest version, is not.

There is no technical support available for Selenium, as it is an open-source product. There is a blog where you can find answers to questions, however, there's no one to actually reach out to. 

Previously, I was using VSTS Ultimate.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward and simple.

You first have to install Java, JDK, in your system. Then you can install an editor such as Eclipse. In Eclipse, you can incorporate all the Selenium jar files.

The solution is free to use.

The reason we are using version 3.14.1 and not the latest version is that this version is the latest most stable option. The most recent versions are often not the most stable. 

I'd rate the solution at a six out of ten.

There are lots of tools in the market that are paid versions, such as QTP. Those have got lots of features. While Selenium has some good features, due to the fact that it's free, you cannot get support, which is why I have reduced my rating by a few points. 

We use the solution to perform tests and robotic process automation.

The solution helps us improve and maintain a specific set of work quality. Also, it saves a lot of time for us.

The solution's core functionality is excellent.

They should add more functionality to the solution. Also, they should provide technical support services.

We have been using the solution for five years.

I rate the solution's stability a ten.

It is a scalable solution. I rate its scalability a ten. It is easy to deploy on any device.

I used Micro Focus UFT One earlier.

The solution's initial setup takes time. I rate the process as one. We require a specialist to download and install it manually. Later, we need to create a framework and set it for an automation process. The entire process is quite complicated for new users.

The solution is an open-source tool.

I recommend the solution to others. Its learning curve is very high for Java and comparatively less for Python. Apart from this, it is highly stable. A lot of documentation is available for it in case of any queries. I rate the solution a nine.