Selenium HQ Reviews

SeleniumHQ is WebDriver-related. It is a package that we can use with any language such as Java or Python.

We use Selenium for automation purposes. For example, if we need data from a website, we write code that will extract the data automatically. If there are logins or pop-ups, the code will close them, so we can extract the data. 

When we are testing a website, we use SeleniumHQ automation testing to determine if there are any bugs.  

The most valuable feature of Selenium is how easy it is to automate. For example, often when data is needed, someone will sit and copy and paste it. What we can do with SeleniumHQ is automate it so that the data is directly extracted from the tools and libraries that we use. This saves time and is much better than copying and pasting.

There are some tiny issues with SeleniumHQ. For example, with respect to the scraping tests. Sometimes, a website will have some hidden items or blockages that inhibit us from extracting data directly. It would be beneficial if Selenium could extract that information.

The other issue is browser-related. There are small bugs causing it to break automatically. Sometimes it will close automatically. 

I have been using SeleniumHQ for a year and a half.

Stability depends on how you write the code. If you handle all conditions, there will be some surprises. Suddenly, you will have pop-ups and other conditions. 

SeleniumHQ is scalable. Anyone can use it. We have approximately 30 users of the solution. 

Customer service and support with Selenium are good. If any bugs are found and brought to their attention, they will immediately help. They provide lots of documentation as well as answers on the internet. The technical support team, themselves, will answer questions within 24 hours.

We use Python, so the initial setup of SeleniumHQ was quick and simple. You can use any browser or tools like, Chrome, Firefox, or Edge to run the automation testing. 

We are using Selenium open-source, so there is no need to purchase anything.

We evaluated other options. 

For mobile scraping, non-mobile scraping, or to test anything mobile there are more applications available on the internet, like Appium for Android, which is like Selenium for browsers, or TestComplete for iOS drivers. 

However, Selenium is particularly the best for browsers or PC, operating systems.

I would recommend this solution to anyone considering implementing it into their organization. Overall, I would rate SeleniumHQ an eight out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for automating a solution on the web and automating testing.

We are a testing company. We can automate testing using Selenium.

The solution is very easy to use. Once you learn how to do things, it becomes very intuitive and simple. It's quite a user-friendly product.

The interface is great.

We've had good experiences dealing with support.

The pricing is fine.

Handling configurations is very good.

The stability has been good.

It's an easy product to set up and deploy.

If a company wants to scale it, it can. 

The product offers a free community edition. 

Selenium has problems with some objects. The objects are not in the squares of the screen. The layout can be a bit strange. It makes it hard to find objects.

We'd like to see some more image management in future releases. 

We've been using the solution for two years at this point. 

The stability is great. We haven't dealt with bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. the performance is good.

If you need to expand the solution, you can. We've never had an issue with scalability.

We have about seven people using the solution at this time. 

Technical support is great. They are helpful and responsive. We haven't had a problem with them.

The initial setup is not complex or hard to do. It's pretty simple and straightforward. A company shouldn't have any problem implementing it. 

We have found the pricing to be reasonable. It's not too high of a cost.

We are actually using the community edition, which is free. 

We are a customer and an end-user. We don't have a business relationship with Selenium.

We have the solution deployed both on-premises and on the cloud. 

I'd rate the product at a nine out of ten. We've been very happy with the product. 

I mainly use Selenium for web applications.

The most valuable features are ExpectedConditions, actions, assertions, verifications, flexible rates, and third-party integrations. I also like that it's an in-house solution, which means you're not dependent on any tool.

I find Selenium to be slow - its server takes a long time to interact with your browser and sometimes fails. It's also somewhat outdated, for example, it has no capacity to handle things like desktop pop-ups, does not support mobile testing, and has very limited reporting. In future releases, I would like Selenium to focus on headless execution when executing their test cases, using PhantomJS or Chrome Headless.

I have six years of experience with this solution.

There are issues with scalability in that it requires a technical person to perform it and takes a lot of time.

Selenium is open-source and has no technical support, but there is a big online community on platforms such as Stack Overflow who provide help for users.

I've previously used Node.js and Cypress.

Selenium is comparatively difficult to set up and requires technical knowledge in order to integrate and configure it. I developed a complete, fully-functional framework for this solution, which took around eight months to automate around 100 test cases.

In Selenium, you have to write extensive code - even if you want to automate one login scenario, you have to write a code of around 50 lines - which uses a disproportionate amount of man-hours. It takes such a long time to use this solution that it may be worth looking into other free solutions such as TestProject or Katalon Studio, or paid solutions to replace it.

Before implementing Selenium, I think it's very important to find out the maximum resusability of the code using the parameterized XPaths.

I would rate this solution as seven out of ten.

Selenuim helps us during testing. We are able to reduce the number and frequency of manual efforts by using scripts.

I would like for the next release to support parallel testing.

We were using Micro Focus UFT which is for Windows application and used Selenium for web use. The two solutions are not comparable in my opinion because they both have their advantages and disadvantages.

The initial setup was straightforward. I was able to add the packages that I wanted and quickly get started with development in a day.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

Currently I am doing mobile application automation with Appium and Selenium, as well as front-end application automation with tools like WAVE for mobile and desktop applications. The only area that I'm not involved in at present is API testing, though I am hoping there will be opportunities to get to that as well in the future.

We typically use Selenium and Appium in automation and testing by first identifying which modules we are able to automate. Then, whenever we encounter some new course in the framework that we're using, and we need to use a hybrid kind of framework, we will use Selenium to resolve it. 

Selenium has improved the way we work because if you do what we need to do manually, you'll have to expend a lot of time. For example, it would be a huge chore to navigate through an application manually every day, and particularly if there's a new build on the way, you would have to check all the regulations over again by hand. That would simply take too much time, and so what Selenium does for us is that in one resource it can handle the work of three, four resources, provided that the scripts are straightforward and coded properly. That's the main cool thing about Selenium, I would say.

For me, the most valuable feature of Selenium lies in its ability to help us find elements quickly. Apart from that, the driver interface is really useful, too. When we implement the Selenium driver interface, we can easily navigate through all of the pages and sections of an app, including performing things like clicking, putting through SendKeys, scrolling down, tagging, and all the other actions we need to test for in an application.

One drawback to Selenium is that there is nothing like an object repository, such as that found in QTP, especially considering continuous integration practices that have become common nowadays. In future, if they can provide an object repository or some kind of repository for data, then that I would greatly appreciate it. For example, once you have the app credentials and all the other security data and you don't want to show them to other people who are not authorized, a repository for this kind of data would be very useful. You could then simply grant access to only those people who need it.

Another improvement I can think of is in the area of documentation and support. With Selenium, we're using freeware software, and because of this there is no support or anything from the vendor. In this case, you have to rely solely on your own coding experience and exposure to the tool, and you often have to search through many pages of code when you want to change something in your implementation. It also makes you rely on your problem-solving skills to a large degree, because some problems are not that easy to solve by yourself.

If I can compare Selenium with another solution such as SoapUI Pro, there's a big difference when it comes to coding your own solutions. With SoapUI Pro, if you want to fetch some data, you don't need to write any code or anything, and for someone with no coding experience, this makes it much easier to be able to use effectively. So, ultimately, more support for non-technical people would make for a great improvement in Selenium.

I have been using Selenium HQ for the last two to three years.

The stability of Selenium depends on the skill level of the team that is using it. If you are writing solid code for automating your scripts, then you will find that Selenium itself is a stable solution. But if you're writing sloppy code then you may find that Selenium slows down or becomes unstable. Truly, I think it all depends on the people who are using it, and how they approach the architecture of the framework.

I am hopeful that Selenium will scale well because, along with others nowadays, we plan to to move into cloud-based provisioning with continuous integration. We will be doing that with AWS, most likely.

I haven't taken any technical support till now because Selenium is freeware, and you will not be getting any technical support directly. So that could be something that they could work on because if they were able to provide support, it would great for us and many others. Without it, you can still add code to the Selenium software itself, but they won't be able to help you with it.

On the other hand, I do believe there is enough documentation online for anyone who wants to figure it out by themselves. There are videos, tutorials, and other resources available to us.

The setup of Selenium is easy, in my experience, since it is provided as JAR files that you can download. Apart from that, there is, I believe, an architectural approach where you can simply input your dependencies and it will automatically download all the JAR files needed, and other required files.

As for deploying the code, this is just as easy. For example, if you're working with some type of continuous integration, it's a breeze to deploy. First, you have to build up your framework, and then you can deploy it to Git, or GitHub, or anywhere you want. At this point it's just about uploading the code, so there's not much to it. 

I am currently implementing Selenium along with a few other tools. For example, for mobile device automation, I'm using Selenium with Appium. The Selenium architecture can be integrated with Appium in order to be able to automate with mobile devices such as Android and iOS, which is what I'm doing now. Beyond that, we also have desktop applications; for Windows we have EXE files and for Mac we have DMG files. With these, I have implemented the Windows application drivers using Selenium so that we're able to easily automate any Windows-based or Mac-based app.

As for the rest of the team who are implementing Selenium this way, we have about 15 people on the testing side of things, and 6 people in automation.

Selenium is free software so we do not pay licensing costs. 

My advice to others is that, first of all, you have to understand the process of automation from a general point of view, and how people get on with the coding and all that. If you only have manual experience, like a lot of new testers, then you likely don't have much experience in coding either. And in that case, my advice would be to first understand the logic of the process. For instance, before jumping into it from the deep end, try get a handle on a few small steps first, and as you go along you will learn the basic coding, the basic architecture, how Selenium works, how the automation process works, and so on.

Then, take a piece of code and ensure that it works as a standalone script, then finally jump into the framework. Develop from any framework, use it as best as possible, get some experience with it, and try to become an expert from there.

You can use any programming language you prefer. As for myself, I'm using Java, but you can use C#, Python, Ruby, PHP, etc. There's a lot of support for different programming languages with Selenium. 

My biggest lessons while using Selenium have had to do with automation and how it really works, which is something I've always been interested in. Once I get an application, any application whether it be a WAVE app or mobile app, I very much enjoy getting stuck into the automation part of testing. And what I've learned is that not everything is that easy to automate.

In many cases, I have had to team up with new solutions and play around with code on my own, which has been a great learning experience for me. Apart from that, with Selenium I have been able to implement new things such as OCR (Optical Character Recognition) which is useful when you are not able to find all the elements you need, and I feel good that I was personally able to enhance the automation process with what I have learned along the way.

I would rate Selenium HQ an eight out of ten. 

We work for a client who does HRM solutions. They wanted us to develop their scripts using Selenium HQ. Typically, we develop UI, API and database scripts. These are the three combinations we have used for them. So their test cases are typically where we initially do some operations on the various applications they have. Then, once the operation is done, we initiate a few API calls and then we validate the data in the database. This whole process of trying to enter into, listen into, and close is done using Selenium HQ. This is what we are doing. We have close to 8,000 test cases in the last three years.

What I like the most about this product is that it gives us a lot of freedom to code anything, there is no restriction on the type of function you can do. Typically, we use Java with it, and Java has a lot of libraries available online, and whatever you need you can just write the Java code for that part of the work and then you can do it. This includes, multi-technology, the UI database, API image based testing - it lets us do everything.

Selenium is good when the team is really technical because Selenium does less built-in methods. If it came with more built-in and pre-built methods it would be even easier for less technical people to work with it. That's where I think the improvement can be.

I would also like to see a good method for image based automation. That's what I believe is a very upcoming thing and is something that Selenium really lacks. The imagery is kind of an automation. It's more of an object decipher, so that's something I really want to see because most of the tools are moving in that direction.

I have been using Selenium HQ for three years.

It is stable, but one issue I see is that whenever there's a new version coming in, every three months or so, the current version changes and the new version of Selenium is not stable and then we have to wait for a week or so to get a patch for that.

We use Selenium HQ on a regular basis.

Overall there are around 20 people working on this just in my area, who are also responsible for delivery as well as maintenance.

On a similar previous project, we scaled it. We went ahead and integrated the continuous integration and Jenkins Pipeline with QA. It was pretty scalable. We were able to connect it to CID and we were able to connect it to JIRA.

In terms of customer support, it is more of a community support. There's a lot of small communities for Selenium HQ. I don't think Selenium HQ has official support. But there are a lot of communities. So typically we go to Stack Overflow and that kind of community where we just look for the support if we get stuck.

The initial setup was pretty easy. There is lot of online documentation and online help. Even if you get stuck somewhere it just takes a few searches to figure out the issue because there is good community support.

We were able to deploy and install this product all by ourselves without any extra help.

We tried MicroFocus UFT and we also evaluated Tosca. These are the two tools we evaluated along with HQ but we felt Selenium HQ was better for us.

The overall need for this project was that we were supposed to integrate across multiple technologies. When we started this project two years back we had to use API and a UI database. We were not allowed to use a lot of technologies. So we realized it would not be easy with other tools to combine three technologies in the same place since it's a different structure. This was not possible with UFT or Tosca. So that was one of the biggest reasons we chose Selenium HQ, because the whole project depended on that kind of a flow.

Additionally, there was the licensing issue. It was pretty costly at Tosca and MicroFocus UFT, whereas Selenium HQ is all open source and has a very good community support. So I think these are the two reasons we chose it.

My personal advice is that it is such an amazing tool to work on. The best thing about the tool is the community support. I don't think any other tool has that kind of a community support. You just post a question on any popular community, like Stack Overflow, and you get answers in like 20 minutes. There are so many people using it which makes life really easy. At the same time, you get a lot of free hands to work on. Meaning because it's based on Java which has so many open source libraries, you can use any library to do any kind of functionality you want. That's a pretty powerful tool. My advice if you get stuck somewhere, is to just put it on community and then you get your answer.

On a scale of one to ten I would rate Selenium HQ an eight.

The primary use of this solution is UI testing.

This has improved our organization through the automation of UI test cases.

The most valuable feature is the Selenium grid, which allows us to run tests in parallel.

Selenium HQ easily integrates with other dependencies.

I would like to see XPath made more reliable so that it can be used in all browsers.

I have been using Selenium HQ for five years.

All the features in Selenium to automate the UI.

Reduced license cost

I've used it for four years.

There were issues.

There were issues.

There were issues.

5/10

5/10

Selenium Grid set-up is bit complex.

I would advise you that it's a good tool to automate UI. There have been issues in the product.