We performed a comparison between CrossBrowserTesting and Worksoft Certify based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Functional Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
"At the moment, all our deploys depend on results of automation. If the tests are failing, then we know that something is wrong at the early stages of development."
"It has increased the speed of our regression testing."
"This solution helps lower the overhead cost associated with buying multiple devices."
"CrossBrowserTesting allows us to test our site with real-world devices in real-world scenarios and find what we're missing."
"I must acknowledge that the customer support has been A++ when I have run into problems."
"I have found CrossBrowserTesting to be scalable."
"Record and Replay is the most used functionality for us, as we can record the test cases and play them on multiple combinations of platforms."
"The extensive range of products available to simulate is something I have come to appreciate as it has resulted in an ability to broaden the scope of our tests."
"The ability to work with the data, with recordsets, and plug those into the scripts is very easy and very powerful. We use it extensively."
"It's script-free, which is really important for our end users because we are usually dealing with colleagues who are not developers and who do not always have the technical background of developing and scripting. It's very useful that there is a nice UI and the tool is script-free."
"The most valuable feature is its time saving. Once development is complete, the short time that it takes to execute a test is invaluable. It saves a number of dollars and man-hours."
"People focus on what they actually want to test and define it in a more detailed way. It shines a light on what they are testing, along with the speed and adaptability."
"The scripting methodology is easy to learn. It is easy to maintain because it is presented in a simple, narrative way. You don't need to know programming." "It has reduced our test maintenance time by more than 50 percent because we don't have to do manual test processes. We have saved over 150 man-hours monthly. It has increased our delivery times. We went from 200 man-hours down (three weeks work time frame) to approximately 40 man-hours (three days work time frame)."
"The tool itself is highly effective, especially when it comes to comprehensibility for newcomers."
"We prefer Worksoft over other platforms because it's a low-code solution"
"It provides a lot of time savings. We are always ready to execute a task whenever the business asks us. We saved approximately 7000 hours in 2018."
"I have had quite a few issues trying to use a virtual machine to test our application on."
"Being able to test on real devices via the virtual connection is wonderful, but it can cause some lag and load time issues while testing."
"This solution would benefit from faster testing and support for more devices."
"We had some issues with the onboarding process and the cloud conductivity could improve."
"Sometimes the testing is slow."
"The five minute timeouts can cause irritation if you have just popped away to consult some supporting documentation."
"A problem that we are facing quite often is related to the network connection. Tests can fail if the remote CrossBrowserTesting's VM has connection problems. This happens mostly with browsers of Internet Explorer family which work on Windows OS."
"I have experienced some lagging issues, and it does not seem like all of the testing environments are configured the same."
"I would like Worksoft Certify to do automation at any layer (the UI layer, API layer, or database layer) and challenge competitors in the RPA industry, like UiPath and Automation Anywhere."
"It is poor for a web based application."
"Worksoft Certify needs a bit of improvement for its web-based processes. It can be difficult because you need to recall the maps, then you still have to add-on for your browser. When you are using the browser-based testing, you cannot even move your mouse or do anything on your system when you are using the web-based testing. Therefore, it needs a bit of improvement on that side. While it does work, it needs improvement. From the SAP side, there is nothing better than Worksoft Certify. However, from the web-based, we are moving towards Fiori. SAP will soon be totally web-based. For Fiori, they need to be great with SAP testing. Thus, Worksoft has to improve the web-based testing part for Certify."
"There was a change to Capture 2.0. In the end, there have been some challenges with the newer version. Therefore, the company testers, the local ones, do not want to use Capture 2.0."
"The technical support has been good, but sometimes there are little delays. A lot of times when we need support, it's an emergency situation."
"Certify is integrated with Solution Manager, but this integration could be easier."
"Worksoft Certify's tech support's response time could be improved."
"When it is unstable, there will be times when a test that we are running in Certify will just stop, and it will say, "Aborted." There will be errors. There will be no explanation as to why it happens. It has now happened maybe one out of 20 times. When it happens, I just tell our QA team to stop Certify and restart it, hoping we don't see it again."
Earn 20 points
CrossBrowserTesting is ranked 28th in Functional Testing Tools while Worksoft Certify is ranked 9th in Functional Testing Tools with 64 reviews. CrossBrowserTesting is rated 9.0, while Worksoft Certify is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of CrossBrowserTesting writes "Static screenshots are the feature most often used, because they are a simple method of detecting problems". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Worksoft Certify writes "Enables us to automate end-to-end testing of our integration between S/4HANA and Salesforce.com". CrossBrowserTesting is most compared with BrowserStack, Bitbar, Tricentis Tosca, LambdaTest and Automai AppVerify, whereas Worksoft Certify is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Selenium HQ, OpenText UFT One, Katalon Studio and UiPath Test Suite. See our CrossBrowserTesting vs. Worksoft Certify report.
See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Functional Testing 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.
