We performed a comparison between CrossBrowserTesting and IBM DevOps Test UI 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."SmartBear has excellent, informative webinars, so keep an eye out for those."
"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."
"The support team is top-notch. I have a great relationship with them. They are extremely honest and responsive."
"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."
"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."
"It has increased the speed of our regression testing."
"I am able to continuously test my new releases across browser versions without issues."
"The most valuable feature is the UI component tester."
"Test automation is most valuable because it saves a lot of time."
"It is compatible with all sorts of Dark Net applications. Its coverage is very good."
"IBM Rational Functional Tester is very contextual."
"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."
"The five minute timeouts can cause irritation if you have just popped away to consult some supporting documentation."
"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."
"It would be useful if we can run the live-testing test cases on multiple platforms at the same time, instead of waiting for one session to finish."
"The speed connection in mobile devices could be improved, because sometimes the load time is uncertain."
"I have had quite a few issues trying to use a virtual machine to test our application on."
"I have experienced some lagging issues, and it does not seem like all of the testing environments are configured the same."
"The "Getting Started" documentation for Selenium testing could be improved."
"As many of our products are moving from PC to mobile, the most important thing that this solution needs is mobile app support."
"They need to do a complete revamp so that even a non-technical person can manage the tool."
"The latest version has increased load time before testing can be run."
"If the solution is running on Linux, there are some issues around application compatibility."
Earn 20 points
CrossBrowserTesting is ranked 28th in Functional Testing Tools while IBM DevOps Test UI is ranked 22nd in Functional Testing Tools with 8 reviews. CrossBrowserTesting is rated 9.0, while IBM DevOps Test UI is rated 7.2. 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 IBM DevOps Test UI writes "Reliable test automation, and test data creation with efficient support". CrossBrowserTesting is most compared with BrowserStack, Bitbar, Tricentis Tosca, LambdaTest and Automai AppVerify, whereas IBM DevOps Test UI is most compared with Katalon Studio, Tricentis Tosca, Selenium HQ, HCL OneTest and Worksoft Certify. See our CrossBrowserTesting vs. IBM DevOps Test UI report.
See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors and best Regression 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.
