Selenium HQ Reviews

We use Selenium HQ for web automation. We are using C Sharp for development.

Using Selenium HQ helps us by executing tests quickly. It saves us time and reduces the need for manual testing of repetitive tasks, thereby reducing efforts.

The most valuable features of Selenium HQ are that it is free and allows using any programming language. Additionally, it supports different frameworks that are suitable for various projects.

There is a challenge with concurrent testing, where parallelization is not fully supported. Sequential tests depending on each other cannot be executed in parallel. This feature could be improved.

I have been using the solution for more than two years.

The stability of the product is good. There are no major issues.

The scalability rating would be around a seven to eight out of ten. There are still challenges with parallelization and testing.

There is enough help available online. Simple questions and repetitive tasks have a lot of available resources. However, finding help for customized scenarios can be challenging.

Positive

The setup process was simple. I managed to complete it by myself.

There are many products that depend on Selenium HQ. Protractor is one of them.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

We employ the version of the solution with the most ease of use, based on a search we conducted five or six years back. We now have a new client who likes the approach we used with a different one. We have a script to download the latest version, integrate it with the regression suite and then run it. Our current and previous clients equally approve of this approach. We make certain to utilize the latest version even when conducting tests during the development stage, as we find it easy to work with.

Remote server execution is a feature we find most valuable. We make use of Selenium Grid as concerns parallel execution. We also find the ordinary features of Selenium Grid to be valuable, 90 percent of our purchases comprising UI and 10 percent back-end.

In the past, we had difficulty with screenshots, but this has been remedied. We feel that all the current solutions are usable and the providers are helpful.

This said, the login could be improved, to obviate the need for relying on another one for integration with Selenium HQ. It would be nice if the solution provided an internal login system, one which would allow us to easily debug it. Until such time as a login system will be added from the vendor application, it will not be possible to identify the exact cause of a potential failure, unless there should be an interaction with, say, the UI element. Selenium HQ currently allows for an exception should an element be stale, not be found, or intractable. 

We have been using Selenium HQ since 2007.

The solution is very stable. I always suggest Selenium, even when conducting internal training. As I consider this to be a better solution than that offered by the competition and one which works, I do the same with my team. I always advocate on behalf of the ease of integration of Selenium HQ.

We have not made use of Selenium HQ’s technical support. We belong to a forum site that we joined some time ago while looking for help in finding an integration solution on the pipeline side. We were able to obtain all the information we needed from the Selenium HQ forum. Meaning, there was no need to contact anyone else with our frequent questions.

The initial setup of the deployment cycle and the process of onboarding users takes an average of 10-15 minutes. This is the length of time it takes for us to set up in our pipeline the data repositories for the regression suite, and, subsequently, integrate the data with Selenium HQ, which is the point at which we run it.

We implement the solution for our clients, not simply resell it.

The solution is very easy to implement. The first step which must be done is to go through the documentation on the site. I feel the solution to be pretty straightforward and people are drawn to it by its ease of use. There is always help available on the web for integration or implementation issues.

I rate Selenium HQ as an eight out of ten.

• Support for UI Automation
• Language support - since it supports Java and other programming languages it is easy to integrate with other systems
• Multiple browser support
• Selenium Grid supports the execution of test case in distributed way

• It's open-source, so there's no need to pay for a license
• Support different programming language hence DevOps and QA work together to built better test suite
• Since it is a lightweight tool, hence it helps in running test cases fast

There is no good tool to find the Xpath. They should provide a good tool to find Xpath for dynamic elements and integrate API (REST/ SOAP) testing support.

I've been using it for five years.

There were no issues with the deployment.

There have been no issues with the stability.

There have been no issues with the scalability.

I have used Silk Test and QTP before using Selenium. The reason for choosing the product can be found in answer 4 and 5.

I used SilkTest and QTP before using Selenium

It was easy to set-up.

We did it in-house one, you choose the solution which best suite your needs. Don’t spend to much time in building robust solution unless it is really required.

I have invested my time in learning the tool and got good recognition for creating automation framework. It can continue to run as open source tool.

You just need to choose the solution which best suites for you.

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 mainly use HQ for UI automation and some of the main functions of test cases. We are customers of Selenium. 

The best thing about the product is that it is open-source and free, which is why we opted for it. It's also customizable which is great for us. There is a lot of online assistance available in forums and support on the Stack overflow. HQ is continually updated and supported by Selenium. You can write your own scripts without needing to depend on what's already there. The UI is automation friendly. When there's a slow network and an older application, the waves get very flaky and Selenium can handle that. Setting up and working with Chrome and Firefox is easy on Selenium.

The solution is intended for browser automation so it's not a support testing tool and there are no features. I'd like to see some flavors of test case management available that don't require any additions and there could be some improvement in the fluid-based area as well. Selenium is meant for developers but QA people cannot write test cases very easily on it. If you don't have a development background, it's tough. 

I've been using this solution for eight years. 

We had a few stability issues initially but it's very stable now.

The product is scalable. We have around 40 to 50 QA users in the company. 

We reported a few bugs on Selenium and they were resolved. The support was mediocre. Because it's open source there's not much support available.

The initial setup is easy but it requires certain development skills to set up. Without that, it's not easy. The difficulty is in creating a framework and that requires thinking about the maintainability and scalability aspects.

We went with Selenium for several reasons; it's open source and free, they provide a lot of support, and we can use Java technology which Selenium has available. Other tools generally don't provide perpetual licenses.

It's important to get hands-on experience with the program. I would also suggest getting your frame pyramid in order. You need to decide on the language you're going to use and have that programming language support in your organization and decide which other tools you're going to use. Also, think of your application and whether Selenium is the appropriate solution.  

This is the most widely used tool throughout the world in this space. It has so much support available and is a benchmark for other tools so I rate the solution eight out of 10.

We use the solution for the test automation of web solutions. It also helps us to create web browsers.  

My company uses the solution for critical deployments. 

I am impressed with the product's ability to catch content from website. 

I have found that at times the tool does not catch the class features of website content correctly. The product's AWS configuration is also hard. 

I have been using the tool for five years. 

The tool is stable but needs to update to the new version of Chrome. 

I would rate the product's scalability an eight out of ten. My company has 2000 users for the solution.

I have never used support. I would search on the internet for tutorials. 

The solution's setup is easy in the local environment but complex on the server side. You need to also update the Chrome version in the cloud before setting it up in the local environment. 

I would rate the product an eight out of ten. The product is easy to use. 

We primarily use the solution as a functional testing tool.

Selenium is a freeware tool, through which I am using Java for automating our project testing and with its feature grid and a different browser, I can do the functional testing. We can automate our functional testing through a browser. It supports all types of browsers including Firefox and Chrome.

We can run multiple projects at the same time and we can design both types of framework, including data-driven or hybrid. We have got a lot of flexibility here.

It's easy to customize according to our needs. 

Now we are getting lots of extensions such as BlazeMeter, where you can record and generate the script and modify, et cetera.

The initial setup is easy.

The parallel testing in Selenium is lacking.

The latest versions are often unstable. 

There's no UI in Selenium. Beginners who want to start using it must have knowledge of Java, Python, or any programming language. If you are using a Chrome extension, that is a BlazeMeter extension, you can record and make the script, however, that is not very helpful for beginners.

The editor is based on Eclipse. It would be nice if there was some in-built UI for this.

I am leading a 20 person team where I have some junior staff and we have to set up lots of demos and training for them to be comfortable with Selenium.

Occasionally, if someone is downloading the latest version of Java, it might not align with the Selenium version. There needs to be a way for Selenium to alert you if there will be a conflict between versions. 

I've been using the solution for four years. 

The level of stability depends on the version you are referencing. For example, Version 3.1.46 is very stable, however, Version 4.0.0, the latest version, is not.

There is no technical support available for Selenium, as it is an open-source product. There is a blog where you can find answers to questions, however, there's no one to actually reach out to. 

Previously, I was using VSTS Ultimate.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward and simple.

You first have to install Java, JDK, in your system. Then you can install an editor such as Eclipse. In Eclipse, you can incorporate all the Selenium jar files.

The solution is free to use.

The reason we are using version 3.14.1 and not the latest version is that this version is the latest most stable option. The most recent versions are often not the most stable. 

I'd rate the solution at a six out of ten.

There are lots of tools in the market that are paid versions, such as QTP. Those have got lots of features. While Selenium has some good features, due to the fact that it's free, you cannot get support, which is why I have reduced my rating by a few points. 

We primarily use the solution for browser compatibility testing and web-based applications.

The most valuable aspect of Selenium is that it gives you the flexibility to customize or write your own code, your own features, etc. It's not restricted by licensing.

The solution is an open-source tool. They should also build other features and tools to assist in further capabilities. 

A drawback of Selenium is that it only focuses on web applications. If it could be integrated into one application together with APM, it would be in peer competition with other players. Developers tend to bundle both in one, but Selenium is just in a silo.

The solution's UI path needs to be modernized.

The solution needs to offer a mobile platform.

Considering that a lot of corporations are using it, it has obviously gained quite a lot of trust from a lot of Fortune 500 companies that use it. It's considered very stable.

It depends on the server you place the solution on, but the application itself is quite scalable.

The technical support is good in the sense that, although is more of an open-source community, there's quite a lot of resources online that are available for troubleshooting issues.

The initial set up requires a bit of research because it's not straightforward. You need to be a developer to be aware of how to set it up. As an open-source tool, you do need to have some kind of background knowledge on how to implement it. Basic deployment takes about a week or two.

Selenium is open-source so it is free to use the solution. You only pay for whoever is implementing and/or the server that you are deploying on.

We use the on-premises deployment model.

I'd recommend Selenium, but it depends on the client's use case. As it is a free solution, users are able to cut a lot of costs. They can bring in developers that are experienced with Selenium, and those developers can build it up, scale it up and then, later on, you just need a few people to maintain it. It's a great option that allows companies to refrain from paying all sorts of license subscriptions that are quite exorbitant.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.