Selenium HQ Reviews

The solution is for front-end testing. It is mainly a testing tool.

There is nothing I cannot do with Selenium. It's very good in terms of features.

The recent changes they've added have been positive. 

The back-end integration and backend web driver supports are great. We integrate with Jira Confluence, Bitbucket, and Jenkins. There is no issue at all.

It has great Dev tools.

The Chrome debugging protocol has been helpful.

We found the initial setup to be straightforward. 

The solution is stable.

It's quite scalable. 

This is an open-source solution that is free to use. 

It supports multiple languages. Many of my friends are working with Selenium with Python language. I am working in Java. People are working in Javascript also. Some people work in this Ruby, C#, et cetera. 

In my previous company, I was using Selenium in my MacBook Air. They could handle iOS with no problem or Windows. It supports different operating systems and multiple browsers. 

It's really not lacking in features at this time. 

We'd like to have more support for Windows applications. 

There's no in-built reporting available. They should work on their reporting functionality. 

I've used the solution for five and a half years. 

It's a pretty stable product. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

It is scalable. I have made many changes, and it is always scalable. It is adaptive, actually. Whatever I do on it, I can adjust. It is scalable.

We have maybe ten people using the solution right now.

We use it daily. 

Whenever we Google issues, we find it easy to find answers. 

We've found support to be good.

I've also used Appium in the past.

The solution offers a very easy initial setup. It's not overly complicated or difficult. Compared to Appium, for example, it's much easier. 

I'd rate the ease of implementation five out of five. 

The product is free to use and open-source. 

The framework and the language should be defined early if a new user plans to take this solution on long-term. It helps to have that figured out so you can implement it correctly. A few years back, I started with Java, however, given the choice, I would have preferred Python.

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten. 

The bank uses Selenium HQ for web application automation. We write functions in Java with the TestNG framework. Working with a reusable library, we develop classes for the login, homepage, and remaining components. Once you create everything for the web application, we run scripts in Jenkins overnight, and then come back to our framework if there are issues. Finally, we use Eclipse to debug the code.

Selenium HQ lets you create your customized functions with whatever language you want to use, like Python, Java, .NET, etc. You can integrate with Selenium and write. 

You can also connect to a database using your JVC to read and write the data. This is the best feature. You can create your functions here, so it's scalable in that sense. You can make any custom function. You need to write the code.

Selenium HQ doesn't support Windows-based applications, so we need to integrate with the third-party vendor. It would be great if Selenium could include Windows-based automation. You need to integrate it with a third-party tool if you want to upload any files. When we interact with a Windows application, we usually use Tosca.

It also doesn't support dynamic capture, graphical presentation, or cloud functionality. We need to integrate with multiple things.

I've been using Selenium HQ for four or five years. 

Support team? No. We actually made a request ... actually, there is no such support, but we extended the Selenium, whatever, we have it, we extended in our COE team, center of excellence. So wherever we are facing the issue, we just contact them. So they try to resolve our issue.

The initial setup is effortless. We only need to download Selenium HQ from the Oracle site and follow some steps, then it's installed. You install the correct version for Java and configure Selenium. It's complex compared to Tosca, but if you have some knowledge on the programming side, you can easily do it.

The time needed for deployment depends on the code, the complexity of the application, and the number of restrictions you have. Deployment takes around 30 minutes to an hour.

There is no license. It's open-source and there are no additional costs.

The bank chose Selenium HQ because it's open-source. It's scalable and we can extend it as needed. That's why we decided to use it.

I rate Selenium six out of 10. If you want to use Selenium, you need basic programming skills in Java, .NET, or Python as well as knowledge of the TestNG framework. You should know how to identify the object from the application and use the developer tool. 

We are using SeleniumHQ for automating the test scripts.

What I like the most is that it is fast. When comparing, it faster than HQ QTP.

It supports multiple processes, which is great.

Just by changing a line of code, it will work with multiple processes.

The locating of web elements is a complex process where you require the WebDriver application and create a locator by using  By Class. They are not always matching.

It would be better to have a simplified way to locate and identify web elements.

Another negative point is that you cannot delete the application, you can only delete the web application.

I have been using this solution for six months.

This solution has been stable. We have not experienced any issues with bugs or glitches.

Selenium HQ does not offer proper support. As a free solution, it doesn't offer proper support. You have to search for some blogs.

The initial setup was fine. It didn't seem to be complex.

The difficulty was with the web interface and finding the objects. I have to inspect elements and this times time.

I am still in training but will improve in the next few months.

It's an open-source tool that you can work with at any time without any cost.

I am at the beginner's level, working alone to get some more practice. It will take some time to have more experience with this solution.

Micro Focus is more user-friendly, and they offer paid support.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We do UI-based functional testing in Selenium. We have prioritized some of the use cases that are most likely to be affected, and we have added those to our regression suite. Each week or each month, we trigger the regression suite to check that nothing is broken.

It supports many external plugins, and because it's a Java-based platform, it's language-independent. You can use Java, C#, Python, etc. It's open to different platforms, but you have to be really good at coding to work with this.

If they can integrate more recording features, like UFT, it would be helpful for automation, but it's not necessary. They can also add a few more reporting features for advanced reporting.

I have been using this solution for the last four years. 

It's a stable product.

It's scalable. If you have a Jenkins setup and you are running on the grid, it's robust and smooth.

We have about 300 users, and it's used on a daily basis.

We have mostly used online support. Whatever you're looking for, the answers are already available on the web. If any technical issues are there, our own internal IT team is also able to fix them. I don't remember any instance of connecting with their support. So, it has been really smooth.

Positive

Its initial setup is a little tough. It could take around six hours, but if you are experienced enough, you can do it within an hour. If you are a complete beginner, it will be a little difficult.

You have to be really good with the POM dependencies, and you have to be used to working on different IDEs, such as IntelliJ or Eclipse ID. Based on the different setups, you have to consider the POM file and also integrate those dependencies. These things take up some time initially, but once they are done, it works well. I would rate it a 4 out of 5 in terms of the setup.

It doesn't require much maintenance. If you are upgrading to a new version, the basic changes will be needed, but not that much maintenance is needed. It's really easy. They do a release every six or seven months.

Selenium is an open-source product. It is free.

It's one of the best tools I have worked on. It's a strong tool and a winner in functional testing and automation testing. It's open source, and it also supports mobile testing. Other tools, such as UFT, are quite expensive. 

I would rate it a 9 out of 10.

I have led regression testing projects involving CRM, employee registration, and eCommerce. In each of these test cases, we have used the automation tool which has brought us benefits in time savings, shortening schedules, or recovering lost time - all of this leading to money savings. 

It's very useful when there are constant changes in the back-end. If the changes are constant in the source end it is not a good idea to use it. It is very important to previously evaluate the use of the tool depending on the characteristics.

The main improvement is the lower cost of regression tests. It will probably be more expensive in the first iteration (more or less 30%), however, we can save up to 40% or 50% in the next runs. 

Another benefit is that, once the test scripts have been built, it is not necessary for the person executing the test processes to be an expert, allowing resources and costs to be optimized with lower costs in human talent. 

In addition, the barrier of functional knowledge is eliminated; specialization is not necessary during the life cycle of the tests.

The main characteristic that is useful is that the tool is completely free.

Additionally, currently, you can find resources that handle the characteristics of the tool very well. 

The range of web platforms it supports is also wide, including the operating system platforms. It is possible to reuse the test scenarios that have been built in iterations after the first one or in the improvements of the systems that are part of the normal maintenance and updating that must be done periodically and that imply an investment in tests.

A great improvement could be in the user experience which is necessary as it does not have much. The use is too technical; it is not designed for the end-user. The best way to maintain the test scenarios over time should be considered. If the test scenarios are not subdivided correctly, it is very likely that maintenance will become very expensive and re-use is unlikely. This would ultimately mean that it would reflect the possible benefits in the projects and, on the contrary, the use of the solution ends up being more expensive.

I have been working with Selenium for five years.

The latest version should always be treated with care. Being open-source it can be unstable.

The scalability will depend on where the tool is installed.

Until now, I have not used the support service. Everything has been done using the documentation that is registered in the forums.

Neutral

In the past, I used a very good solution. However, it had a high cost and had to be used by more than one resource.

The initial setup can be very complex.

In my case, the initial setup was done internally.

The ROI can be between 20% to 50% in the testing process in the medium and long term. In the short term, it can be 10% or less.

As for the license, there is not much to say. It is free, however, the configuration must be done correctly or it can be very expensive.

Other options that I evaluated were TestComplete, Kathalon, and IBM.

It must be evaluated very well before being used. In my case, we implemented a front-end that facilitates the use. If you want to use it in the future I can give you some access.

We are using Selenium for web test automation.

We are saving time with regression testing by using test automation.  

Selenium is also open source, so now we are integrating all our automation tests into the full pipeline. 

Selenium is very famous. Due to its popularity, you can find pretty much any answer in open discussions from the community. This is the power of Selenium. Whatever you need, whatever your question, you will find an answer.

The initial setup is easy.

You can integrate the solution with pretty much anything.

It's open-source and free to use.

Maybe they could improve the record and play plugin for element detection. That would be ideal. If they could build some tools above Selenium for that, I'd find it helpful. People sometimes do not have that much technical knowledge, and having something more plug-and-play would be appealing.

We have many plans in our pipeline that still need to be implemented. Maybe we will find that we need some features that need to be integrated with Selenium, for example, for a multi-browser or for implementing many machines. We haven't fully implemented this solution yet.

The drawback is the solution is not easy to learn. You need resources and technical knowledge and have to deal with the maintenance of script changes. 

While it works well with Chrome, if you use it with other browsers, you may have issues. 

I've been using the solution for three or four years. 

We've never had any stability issues. It's reliable. The performance is good. It doesn't crash or freeze.

It is scalable. It's easy to expand. 

We have about 15 people working on the solution. 

I've never spoken to technical support per se. We tend to get help via the community if we have questions. It is quite robust and there is a lot of information about all kinds of issues publicly available. 

I have used other tools as well. Each tool has its own pros and cons. Each organization also has its own unique needs. There are budgets, resources, and other factors that would come into play as well.

The solution isn't difficult to set up. It's quite straightforward. 

I'd rate the ease of setup eight out of ten. 

I cannot recall exactly how long the deployment itself took. 

Sometimes there may be some maintenance required around upgrades. You would need to check the compatibility between the software, for example. That said, the maintenance requirements are pretty low. It's not complex to maintain the product. 

We handled the implementation ourselves, in-house. 

This is an open-source solution, which is a very positive benefit. 

I'd rate the solution six out of ten. It's not an out-of-the-box solution like Oracle or SAP. 

We are using Selenium HQ for automated UI testing of web applications.

The most valuable features of Selenium HQ are the automation of all UI tests, its open-source, reliability, and is supported by Google.

Selenium HQ can improve by creating an enterprise version where it can provide the infrastructure for running the tests. Currently, we need to run the test in our infrastructure because it's a free tool. If Google can start an enterprise subscription and they can provide us with the infrastructure, such as Google Cloud infrastructure where we can configure it, and we can run the test there, it would be highly beneficial.

I have been using Selenium HQ for approximately nine years.

Selenium HQ is highly stable.

The scalability of Selenium HQ is good.

We have approximately 10 testers that are using this solution.

The initial setup of Selenium HQ is very difficult. You need different configurations on your system, such as Java and you need to configure it. Additionally, you need to have some IDEs such as Eclipse or IntelliJ IDEA on your system. Selenium is supported in many languages, such as .NET, Java, Python, JavaScript, and C#. So, at least you must be knowing any one of these languages, then only you can use Selenium.

The solution requires coding experience to be able to implement.

The deployment does not take a lot of time. You can create a continuous integration pipeline with TeamCity or Jenkins, and then you can run tests.

Selenium HQ is a free and open-source solution and is supported by Google.

We evaluated Tricentis Tosca and it was expensive and Selenium HQ is free. This is why we choose Selenium HQ.

My advice to others is the first step to using Selenium HQ is to learn a programing language.

I rate Selenium HQ a nine out of ten.

It's a very stable tool and it's open-source, and there are new versions available. The new versions come quickly and frequently, you receive a successor version with bug fixes very easily. The tool is easy to use and highly configurable.

We use the solution to perform tests and robotic process automation.

The solution helps us improve and maintain a specific set of work quality. Also, it saves a lot of time for us.

The solution's core functionality is excellent.

They should add more functionality to the solution. Also, they should provide technical support services.

We have been using the solution for five years.

I rate the solution's stability a ten.

It is a scalable solution. I rate its scalability a ten. It is easy to deploy on any device.

I used Micro Focus UFT One earlier.

The solution's initial setup takes time. I rate the process as one. We require a specialist to download and install it manually. Later, we need to create a framework and set it for an automation process. The entire process is quite complicated for new users.

The solution is an open-source tool.

I recommend the solution to others. Its learning curve is very high for Java and comparatively less for Python. Apart from this, it is highly stable. A lot of documentation is available for it in case of any queries. I rate the solution a nine.