BrowserStack vs Qt Squish comparison

"BrowserStack's best feature is browser testing across different platforms, including mobile."

"The product guides and resources are extensive and very helpful."

"I've worked on testing integrations with BrowserStack, particularly with a platform called IT. This involves testing the registration process, including receiving verification codes on devices and phones. BrowserStack has been excellent for testing these integrations, providing a seamless workflow development experience."

"We like the model device factory for iOS and Android devices."

"The most valuable feature is the variety the solution offers around the different types of devices, especially mobile devices."

"The main core concept behind this product is, it takes the overhead of maintaining all of your devices or particular computers. It continuously adds the latest devices that are coming into the market."

"The most valuable feature of BrowserStack is the ability to do manual testing."

"Local testing for products with no public exposure is an advantage in development."

"This product can work with QT applications and cross-cut from them on Windows or Mac."

"Squish is integrated with Qt, which enables us to test the user interface effectively."

"I like the dashboard. It's virtual, and you can see the customer results. I can do it at night and in the morning. I think it also automatically emails results."

"I find it very user-friendly and easy to start working with. The main benefit for me is that it allows testing applications developed in the Qt language. This capability makes Squish a game-changer, as it's the only tool I've found that enables automation for applications written in Qt. I appreciate three main aspects. Firstly, the documentation is excellent. Secondly, I value the way the tool efficiently locates elements during testing. These are the two aspects I particularly like."

"The initial setup process is straightforward."

"froglogic Squish is one of the most desired solutions if you are having a Qt as a framework and if you are looking at GUI regression testing. froglogic is a part of Qt as a company."

"I would like to see clearer visibility."

"Customer support could be better. We tried to implement and explore this product with the vendor or reseller's help, but we haven't had any good response about the product."

"Sometimes BrowserStack is really slow and devices are not loading. it is really annoying and that's why we bought several newer devices because sometimes it's affecting us a lot."

"There is room for improvement in pricing."

"It is difficult to use for someone who has little to no experience."

"BrowserStack should work on its Internet connectivity although issues only occur occasionally."

"Adding better integration with frameworks, particularly testing frameworks like Robot, would be of more value to customers and make their jobs easier."

"I haven't seen AI in BrowserStack, making it in an area where improvements are required in the product."

"The price could be better."

"We encountered issues with the embedded environment and building for the Qt version."

"ID could be improved with suggestions of names, variables or class."

"I'm relatively new to Squish, so I'm not familiar with all its pros and cons. Currently, I haven't identified any specific improvements. However, one feature I miss is Git integration within the tool. In my previous experience with Selenium and Python in PyCharm, it was straightforward to create and review changes before pushing them. I haven't found a similar option in Squish, and having an integrated tool for managing conflicts would be beneficial in certain scenarios where collaboration is involved."

"The platform could be improved by implementing some basic functionalities that are frequently used, such as login procedures and screen handling when multiple screens are used at the workplace."

"There had been a lot of improvements with froglogic Squish already. There were some scenarios in which this particular solution was available in different flavors. They have pulled everything together in one solution. There were some monitoring systems, which were missing out from the solution earlier. They have a centralized dashboard for monitoring the test cases and their execution. It's a full-blown solution, there are not many glitches in terms of something missing out of the package."

"There are different licenses available that can be customized. You can select the features that you want only to use which can be a cost-benefit."

"Compared to other solutions, BrowserStack is one of the cheapest."

"BrowserStack could have a better price, but good things have a price."

"As for pricing, I can't provide a clear evaluation as I'm not directly involved in those discussions."

"The price of BrowserStack is high."

"This solution costs less than competing products."

"My company found the product's license to be very compatible with our budget, and we pay 5,000 to 10,000 per year for licenses."

"The price is fine."

"The platform is highly-priced."

"It is expensive."

"The price could be better. I believe each developer license costs about 6000 or 7000 Euros per year."