Bitbar vs CrossBrowserTesting comparison

Bitbar and CrossBrowserTesting are both solutions in the Functional Testing Tools category. Bitbar is ranked #27, while CrossBrowserTesting is ranked #28. Bitbar holds a 1.0% mindshare in FT, compared to CrossBrowserTesting’s 0.9% mindshare. Additionally, 50% of Bitbar users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of CrossBrowserTesting users who would recommend it.

Bitbar

Read 3 Bitbar reviews

1,121 Views
814 Comparison Views

50% willing to recommend

CrossBrowserTesting

Read 19 CrossBrowserTesting reviews

850 Views
669 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Bitbar

CrossBrowserTesting

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Bitbar and CrossBrowserTesting 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.

To learn more, read our detailed Bitbar vs. CrossBrowserTesting Report (Updated: November 2024).

Buyer's Guide

Bitbar vs. CrossBrowserTesting

November 2024

Download the complete report

Helped 816,406 peers since 2012

Categories and Ranking

Bitbar

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

27th

Average Rating

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Mobile App Platforms (12th)

CrossBrowserTesting

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

28th

Average Rating

9.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of Bitbar is 1.0%, down from 1.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of CrossBrowserTesting is 0.9%, down from 1.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Functional Testing Tools

Featured Reviews

Muhammad Waleed

Senior Software Quality Assurance Engineer at a computer software company with 501-1,000 employees

It's helped me when I've been short of devices and want to test whether the application will work on a specific device or not.

It's good that Testdroid are providing more devices to end users so that one who doesn't have a device can use it on the cloud. It's helped me when I've been short of devices and want to test whether the application will work on a specific device or not Device fragmentation was good enough for…

Read full review

Michael Hutchison

Web Specialist at Mayo Clinic

Static screenshots are the feature most often used, because they are a simple method of detecting problems

The screenshot tool defaults to a screen layout instead of a full page test. I find it a bit cumbersome that I can't have it run a full screenshot as my default. Every time, I have to select the full screen, then restart its captures, which seems a waste of time and energy. This is, admittedly, a minor complaint.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros

"Ability to use different frameworks."

"Game testing and the API for apps are good."

"With screenshots, I can quickly verify a page looks universally good in minutes."

"Each new session started with the live testing feature allows for a cleared browser and new experience to be able to not only see these attributes on the page clearly but also pass clean data."

"CBT has made it easier to troubleshoot issues across devices when we do not have actual access to those specific devices. I even opt for CBT sometimes when we do have access to the device just because it is easier."

"I can run a page through the screenshot tool, then send a URL with the results to my team."

"The screen shot portal is essential for an easy way to run tests across hundreds of browsers and retrieve screenshots which then indicate success or failure."

"The ability to replay sessions is valuable for tracking down issues."

"When I started to work on testing automation, I was very excited about how easy it is to run tests on different browsers. It was just a matter of configuration."

"It was the perfect solution that saved us time and money to perform web viewing tests on real devices, which allowed our team to correct multiple failures in devices."

More CrossBrowserTesting pros

Cons

"Lacking capability options that can be directly integrated."

"Their pricing structure is complicated and can be improved."

"I have had quite a few issues trying to use a virtual machine to test our application on."

"A wider range of physical devices with more browser versions in the Selenium Grid would be great to insure users with out-of-date devices are able to interact with our sites."

"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."

"There should be more detailed training on CrossBrowserTesting."

"Elements of 'real' mobile/tablet testing could be sped up."

"Sometimes, some of their instances fail, particularly in older versions of browsers."

"Sometimes the testing is slow."

"The screenshot tool defaults to a screen layout instead of a full page test. I find it a bit cumbersome that I can't have it run a full screenshot as my default."

More CrossBrowserTesting cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is complicated. It's in the middle."

"It is worth the pricing as the product is supported on multiple platforms and browsers."

"CrossBrowserTesting offered the best value for its price."

"A few intermediary pricing options for small QA teams would be nice, e.g., unlimited screenshots, "as you need it" parallel tests, etc."

"SmartBear offers bundles of products that work together."

"The lowest price point is very reasonable. It is also useful if only one person in the company needs to check on the browser display."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

18%

Comms Service Provider

11%

Financial Services Firm

11%

Government

Computer Software Company

24%

Financial Services Firm

15%

Government

Educational Organization

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Comparisons

BrowserStack vs Bitbar

Compared 35% of the time

Sauce Labs vs Bitbar

Compared 31% of the time

SmartBear TestComplete vs Bitbar

Compared 11% of the time

LambdaTest vs Bitbar

Compared 11% of the time

More Bitbar Competitors

BrowserStack vs CrossBrowserTesting

Compared 54% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs CrossBrowserTesting

Compared 22% of the time

Sauce Labs vs CrossBrowserTesting

Compared 13% of the time

More CrossBrowserTesting Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Mobile App Platforms

November 2024

Download Bitbar product report

Buyer's Guide

CrossBrowserTesting

November 2024

Download CrossBrowserTesting product report

Also Known As

Testdroid

No data available

Learn More

SmartBear

Overview

Testdroid is a set of mobile software development and testing products by Bitbar Technologies Limited. Testdroid comprises three different products: Testdroid Cloud, Testdroid Recorder and Testdroid Enterprise. Testdroid provides an application programming interface through open source software available on GitHub. Testdroid can use testing frameworks, such as Robotium, Appium and uiautomator for native and Selenium for web applications, targeted for mobile application and game developers. Testdroid Cloud contains real Android and iOS powered devices, some of which are available for users. Testdroid Cloud lets users run tests simultaneously on cloud-based service. Testdroid Recorder is a tool for developers and testers for recording user-actions and producing JUnit based test cases on mobile application and games. Testdroid Recorder is available at the Eclipse marketplace. Testdroid Enterprise is a server software for managing automated testing on multiple real Android and iOS powered devices, supporting Gradle build system and Jenkins Continuous Integration.

CrossBrowserTesting is a cloud testing platform that gives instant access to 1500+ different real desktop and mobile browsers for testers, developers, and designers.

Native debugging tools make manual testing easy to inspect and correct HTML, CSS, and JavaScript errors on any browser.
Take automated screenshots across multiple browsers at once, then compare side-by-side against historical test runs.

Sample Customers

Rovio, Paf, Supercell, NITRO Games, Seriously, AVG, Google, Bosch, Yahoo, Microsoft, Yandex, Mozilla, eBay, PayPal, TESCO, Cisco WebEx, Facebook, LinkedIn, skype, Subway

St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Accenture, Sony, Los Angeles Times, ADP, Verizon, T-Mobile, Wistia

Buyer's Guide

Bitbar vs. CrossBrowserTesting

November 2024

Free Report: Bitbar vs. CrossBrowserTesting

Find out what your peers are saying about Bitbar vs. CrossBrowserTesting and other solutions. Updated: November 2024.

DOWNLOAD NOW

816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Bitbar vs. CrossBrowserTesting 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.