We performed a comparison between Appium and BlazeMeter based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about OutSystems, Mendix, Salesforce and others in Mobile Development Platforms."It has great documentation and excellent community support."
"We develop apps using the React Native framework, and Appium integrates well for testing those apps. The Appium automation framework also has good integration with GitHub Actions and plenty of other tools and frameworks, including BrowserStack."
"The library is extensive so the driver interacts with most functions or actions on mobile devices."
"The most valuable feature of Appium is it supports iOS and AOS and is open-source."
"The most valuable feature is that it's easy to launch applications. Appium has everything that Selenium has. So many good tools support Appium. We can take some Excel sheets and use them to fill out the text box that's in there. We can also take screenshots of failures."
"The best feature of Appium is that it allows you to inspect the element. With the Appium Inspector, you don't have to install another application to do the inspection. I also like that Appium has Android device connectivity. Currently, most people use Appium as automation software, and I haven't found any other tool that's more powerful than Appium."
"We do not need to pay for the solution. It’s free."
"Appium provides a record-and-play option, and the commands are the same as those that Selenium uses. So a person who has some exposure to Selenium will be able to write a piece of code in Appium."
"It is a stable solution. When we compare BlazeMeter with other tools in the market, I can say that the solution's overall performance has also been very good in our company."
"The product's initial setup phase was simple."
"Its most valuable features are its strong community support, user-friendly interface, and flexible capacity options."
"For me, the best part is that we can graphically see the test result at runtime. It helps us understand the behavior of the application during all stages of the test."
"One thing that we are doing a lot with the solution, and it's very good, is orchestrating a lot of JMeter agents. This feature has helped us a lot because we can reuse other vendors' performance scripts that they have used with JMeter before."
"The on-the-fly test data improved our testing productivity a lot. The new test data features changed how we test the applications because there are different things we can do. We can use mock data or real data. We can also build data based on different formats."
"BlazeMeter can be used for both API and performance testing, it is a multi-facility tool."
"The solution offers flexibility with its configurations."
"The user interface needs improvement because there are issues when setting up environment variables."
"If it had more facility for configuration it would be a spectacular solution."
"Configuration-wise, there is a lot of room for improvement."
"Appium could improve by enabling record and run techniques similar to what they have in other licensing tools, such as Micro Focus. We have to all write the code, and then we can proceed."
"We previously worked with native applications, and there weren't any good mobile app testing tools. We started working with React Native, which works well with Appium, but it would be good to see better integration; the way elements are displayed can be messy. React Native is very popular nowadays, so it's essential to have that compatibility."
"We haven't been able to fully leverage Appium for multiple reasons. I think number one is just that the tests take a long time to run. We have had some issues around just the results themselves and how predictable they are, but those are not issues with Appium directly."
"The challenging part with Appium is that installation can be a bit tricky. It can be challenging to set up in Android versus iOS environments."
"Support-wise, it could be better."
"The product currently doesn't allow users to run parallel thread groups, making it an area that should be considered for improvement."
"We encountered some minor bugs, and I would like to have the ability to add load generators to workspaces without having to use APIs. We can't do that now, so we're beholden to the APIs."
"Version controlling of the test cases and the information, the ability to compare the current version and the previous version within Runscope would be really nice. The history shows who made the changes, but it doesn't compare the changes."
"Potential areas for improvement could include pricing, configuration, setup, and addressing certain limitations."
"The only downside of BlazeMeter is that it is a bit expensive."
"In terms of improvement, I would like to have the ability to customize reports."
"Scalability is an area of concern in BlazeMeter, where improvements are required."
"The reporting capabilities could be improved."
Appium is ranked 7th in Mobile Development Platforms with 25 reviews while BlazeMeter is ranked 4th in Performance Testing Tools with 41 reviews. Appium is rated 8.0, while BlazeMeter is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Appium writes "It's easy to launch applications". On the other hand, the top reviewer of BlazeMeter writes "Reduced our test operating costs, provides quick feedback, and helps us understand how to build better test cases". Appium is most compared with Katalon Studio, Tricentis Tosca, Perfecto, Xamarin Platform and Apache JMeter, whereas BlazeMeter is most compared with Apache JMeter, Tricentis NeoLoad, OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, OpenText LoadRunner Professional and BrowserStack.
We monitor all Mobile Development Platforms 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.
