SmartBear TestComplete Mobile enables automated testing of mobile applications, ensuring quality and performance. It supports diverse testing needs and integrates with various testing frameworks to streamline processes.
| Product | Mindshare (%) |
|---|---|
| SmartBear TestComplete Mobile | 2.4% |
| Tricentis Tosca | 22.0% |
| OpenText Functional Testing | 17.4% |
| Other | 58.2% |
SmartBear TestComplete Mobile offers a robust platform for mobile application testing, allowing teams to automate testing processes across iOS and Android devices. Known for its flexibility, it integrates smoothly with Jenkins and other CI/CD systems, enhancing test efficiency and reducing errors. Users can benefit from its easy-to-navigate interface, comprehensive scripting options, and keyword-driven testing capabilities. With detailed reporting and analytics, teams can quickly identify issues, ensuring faster deployment cycles.
What are the most important features?Industries such as retail, financial services, and healthcare implement SmartBear TestComplete Mobile to quickly adjust to market demands. For instance, in retail, it ensures that mobile apps function correctly during high-traffic sales periods, enhancing customer satisfaction and driving sales growth.
Cisco, J.P. Morgan, Boeing, McAfee, EMC, Intuit
| Author info | Rating | Review Summary |
|---|---|---|
| Development team leader / APPR at a government with 501-1,000 employees | 4.0 | I've used TestComplete for functional testing for years, finding its features effective. However, I often struggle with browser object detection and consolidating test logs. Its rising cost is a concern, but I still rate it 8/10. |
| Software Test Engineer at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees | 4.0 | I like TestComplete for its easy test coding and Object Spy, but I struggle with complicated mapping and limited mobile list/collection view support. Stability issues and unsupported controls also hinder its effectiveness, leading to inconsistent test runs. |
| Works | 4.0 | I find the automatic alias remapping valuable, despite difficulties with old software and the interface. Setup was easy, and recent versions are stable. Customer service was helpful. I recommend it, but hope for interface improvements. |
The application is smaller than the transaction applications. It's a very delicate, complex application. Now I use it, however, it's just a test function for functional testing.
I use TestComplete ID for writing test, functional, scripting. There are a lot of features in this tool. It's more complete with click and playback and proper things.
There are a lot of features in this tool, making it more complete with click and playback and proper things. It is very effective for detecting breaks and also for verifying the needs of the application before deploying it or when introducing a new product.
There are complaints about not detecting all objects in the browser. I have to check and verify, and sometimes I have to bypass certain steps, which is a problem. I need to check the solution to understand why it's too detailed to detect or think of the browser.
I use Chrome. Sometimes in Chrome, it doesn't detect certain elements in the web application. That's the problem.
Also, when I run tests, I cannot export different types of logs in the same document. When I run different tests, it provides different logs, and these logs cannot be put in the same document. I have to compile them manually.
Additionally, the tool can manage WinRamp scripts. I would say SilkTest also allows me to run tests, and I can challenge the sequencing, but it doesn't always do this correctly.
I have been using the solution for almost 20 years.
If I have a problem, I resolve it myself. Still, when I want to delve deeper into scripting, checking the community forums is helpful. I find more technical solutions there.
The documentation is helpful for beginners. However, to become an expert, I need to seek more.
I use only TestComplete. I have used it a lot and for two years.
The solution is straightforward to use.
I use the product only for all related tasks. I handle updates and installations myself. I manage the queries as well.
The price is becoming more expensive every year. It’s growing. Previously, we had two licenses. Now we have one. The company is trying to reduce the costs, and the solution has become expensive.
It's straightforward to use. I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.
I like that it offers internal methods for supported controls. It is very easy to code the tests. Object Spy is also a good feature.
The mapping is pretty complicated because there are a lot of controls that are the same and if you have a long name with the object mapping it is easy to get confused.
TestComplete is perfect if you have an automation ID or something unique to each controller. Unfortunately our developers said that it's very hard to maintain all the names and automation IDs. Maybe in the future with this mapping part would be better.
The list view part and the collection view part need improvement. I remember when I used TestComplete earlier versions we didn't need to install the mobile application and we had access to the controls using Object Spy inside the list view and now, unfortunately, it only has a property view. From there, I can't find the specific element inside.
I have been working with SmartBear for the last two and a half years.
The stability will depend. I was running a test on my mobile and I got a call and I had to pick up and then the test was running, but when I connected again the mobile and stopped the test run, the application crashed.
I reopened the ticket because our manager was in contact with someone at SmartBear and we cannot send our application. Sometimes when we expand something in the collection view and we want to tap in the test, the application is forced closed and there's an error occurred and no details.
The usage depends on the project that I'm working on. Until the beginning of this year, I used it weekly, like every day when I was at working hours.
I'm pretty satisfied with technical support. The only problem is this that if we can't send a sample application, somehow the ticket doesn't get answered and we have to reopen.
The setup is and isn't straightforward. If we leave the license open and someone forgets to close it when I want to open it again and he closes it and I choose mobile again, I have to customize the toolbar and select the screen monitor again. I would like for this to be improved.
Sometimes when I tried to remote set up one of my colleagues' machines for TestComplete it did not recognize the parts with the login.
I believe that the best advice would be to analyze the application that needs to be tested on different platforms and then decide because we used some UI controls that are not yet supported by SmartBear and that involved some coordination to find out the exact coordinates of a control. We received a solution for this, which we use currently. Unfortunately, it only works around 80%.
Sometimes a control overlaps. For example, a progress bar overlaps the item from the list view and a problem will occur. We have some test runs that sometimes are different. We have three test runs for 60 tests and the first time it's green, the second time one fails and so on. It is not consistent, but this problem occurs also because some of the controls are not fully supported by TestComplete.
I would rate TestComplete a seven out of ten.
Our primary use case of the program is to remap aliases.
The features I find most valuable is the automatic remapping of aliases because it is really helpful.
I would like to see an improvement in the interface and design. It is very difficult to use the aliases on old software, which hasn't been designed for us to test out. Maybe this is more applicable to the software we tried to use it on, but I found it very difficult.
We've had some problems with crashes, but that was when we were using the previous version. Everything has been running smooth on the latest version.
I am the only user of the solution but I believe it is scalable.
I've had a few issues with testing, but it was resolved by the technical team. So I am satisfied by their technical service.
The initial setup was easy, but we had a few issues because we used an old school application.
I will recommend this platform, but it all depends which technology the user would like to test. I would like to see a better interface in the future, so my rating for this solution is eight out of ten.
