What advice do you have for others considering Selenium HQ?

Selenium is easy to use, with a straightforward setup and many reusable features. It is advisable for new users to explore its features and leverage its form and page update model capabilities. For example, maintenance is simplified because changes made to a base function automatically reflect on all pages.

For users starting with automation, I recommend learning Selenium with any language they're comfortable with, such as Java, C Sharp, Python, JavaScript, or Ruby on Rails. It sets up a foundation for any tester wanting to explore automation testing. I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

If you are new to Selenium, I recommend leveraging online forums and community support to navigate the setup process and address any challenges. The documentation may only sometimes provide clear answers, but the community is a great resource. Overall, I rate it a nine out of ten.

I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten. For QA professionals planning to do front-end automation, I highly recommend Selenium HQ. It's the oldest automation tool and has support from a global community.

In our organization, we use Atlas for IDE and Maven for Eclipse to copy the dependencies from the cloud, and the rest of the testing process is setup using a test engine. For testing web applications using Selenium HQ, the panel application and test synchronization features have proven the most beneficial. Selenium HQ supports almost every project browser, like Edge, Firefox, and Chromium, for testing automation. I would definitely recommend Selenium HQ to others, it's a robust product for automating applications. I would rate Selenium HQ as nine out of ten.

It's crucial for technicians to thoroughly evaluate whether the solution aligns with the end-to-end application needs, especially considering the complexity of enterprise applications. For leveraging features like ERP integration or mobile testing, it is better to understand the compatibility and support for specific devices. I rate Selenium HQ a seven out of ten.

Selenium HQ is deployed on-cloud in our organization. Overall, I rate Selenium HQ a nine out of ten.

You need to be aware of Selenium HQ's architecture. I rate it a ten out of ten.

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

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.

I rate Selenium HQ a seven out of ten.

If you are wanting to do some web-based automation, definitely Selenium HQ is a good solution. I would rate Selenium HQ a six out of ten.

I'm an end-user. The solution is okay, however, you need to use it together with the TestNG and with Maven and use different plugins that improve it. I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

This solution is good to use if the application that is getting identified for the objects is able to uniquely identify the properties. If this process works well then it is good to use. If it is a web application, they can use this solution, but if a desktop-based application is involved, then they should look for another solution. I rate Selenium HQ an eight out of ten.

I would recommend that anyone who is looking to implement Selenium into their organization should have strong technical knowledge. At least one person should have some programming language skill set in either Java, Python or C#. Selenium libraries are a tool that could be reused, but how to frame, integrate and optimize by reducing a line of code to get the proper maximum efficient output requires technical knowledge. It is valuable to have experience prior to joining the Selenium HQ community. Overall, I would rate Selenium HQ an eight out of 10.

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.

We are customers. I'd advise users to take advantage of community posts. If the person finds any trouble, Google it. Probably someone already has found the same issue and also has found the solution or the workaround for it. In general, I have no complaints about this product. I would rate it nine out of ten.

I would recommend anyone thinking of implementing Selenium HQ to go for it - it fits into every format, depending on your time and skillset. I would rate Selenium HQ nine out of ten.

I'm just a consumer or end-user. We deploy on the cloud and on Jira as well. I'm working on the latest version of the solution. I'd rate the solution an eight out of ten. If they fixed the reporting functionality, I'd rate it higher.

I would rate this solution 8 out of 10. My advice for those who want to start using this solution is to analyze the project very well and choose the right tool for the project. For small projects, choose Selenium. It's the best option.

I would rate this solution 8 out of 10. Learning is easy. Implementation is not as easy, but it is still better than other tools in the market right now. I'm giving it an eight because there are a lot of things Selenium is not supporting. The rest of technology is changing, but they are not changing along with it. Normally, if we are writing a complex test, we have to do a lot of workarounds, which isn't good when we are writing scripts. I think it's very easy to screw up with Selenium if you're using it for the first time. If you are getting it for a large organization or large project, it makes sense to have some professional help.

I would recommend this solution to others. I would rate it a seven out of 10.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

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.

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.

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.

I would surely recommend others to use Selenium as we do, especially because while using Selenium we can use Java concepts as well. It's great that, through Java, anybody can use Selenium; even novice programmers. In today's market, automation is a big part of every organization, and Java programming skills can hugely enhance the use of tools like Selenium. One of the biggest lessons I learned was during my time as part of the development team. I didn't want to work in the manual testing team and so when my development project was completed, I moved to the automation department because I wanted to carry on being productive. With this move, I realized that I could easily learn other tools and technologies that are useful in the market, by adapting my programming skills in Java, Python, or any other programming language, to working with tools such as Selenium. In addition to my Selenium work, I also now do Rapid Automation as an automation engineer. I would rate Selenium HQ an eight out of ten.

I rate SeleniumHQ seven out of 10. When you're choosing a solution, it depends upon the type of applications you are using in your project. If you have only have desktop and mobile, go for Selenium. However, if you have multiple applications like Windows-based applications, a virtual machine-based application, or a mainframe .NET application, I suggest going with another tool, like Tosca UFT.

I have worked full-fledged on Selenium WebDriver along with the multi-tenancy for the JavaScript framework. I have hands-on experience with the Selenium framework, and I also worked on, API for APA automation Currently I am working in the healthcare domain. In my opinion, it is a complete end-to-end solution. As of now, it's for only web APIs. It provides a complete solution. I don't see that it's many disadvantages, except when doing the coding. A person should have perfect coding skill sets. If they don't have a coding skillset, it's a little difficult for them to get started. We had completed multiple POCs to present to our clients. It was pretty straightforward for me. I didn't experience a lot of difficulties getting into Selenium. If your framework with Selenium is good, then it gives you the correct output. I would rate Selenium an eight out of ten.

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.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Selenium HQ a seven.

I would recommend this solution to others.

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.

I would advise potential users to contact their IT guys because they will have a problem setting up the first automation. Of course, if there are people like me who want to develop their own knowledge, I would say they need time to get to know how to use it, optimize the process, etc. But if not, it will be easier for end-users to start with some kind of RPA offering by different vendors because they have their tools prepared for the end-users, for onboarding, and so on. Because these open-source tools are still tools made for developers and IT guys, not for end-user. On a scale from one to ten, I would give Selenium HQ a six.

We are just a customer and end-user. I'm not sure which version number we're using. However, it is a version from 2020, from the last year or so. I'd advise those considering the solution, if you want use SeleniumHQ, it's a good option if you have good developers that understand the tool and can make changes in the tool. If you have the right people on hand, it works very, very well. I'd rate the solution at a seven out of ten. If it didn't need such technical expertise, I might rate it higher.

My advice for anybody who is considering Selenium HQ is that if there is a timeframe that is separate from the automation then it is suitable. However, if there is no timeframe and the issue does not fit into the automation, and it needs to be adapted manually, then this product is not a good choice. I would rate this solution a six out of ten.

You need a person who knows one programming language thoroughly. It is not like anybody can pick and work on this solution. You should be thorough enough on the language and the framework that you are choosing. Only then Selenium HQ is the way to go. I would rate Selenium HQ a seven out of ten.

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.

In summary, this is a good product. If it is a web application that you are testing then this is the best option. I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

If you are using it for the automation test, automation is generally good. If you have an experienced developer, it will be really good to deploy the open-source frameworks for Selenium. I would rate it a seven out of ten. Not a ten because they don't come loaded with the frameworks or different framework options. You have to build it from scratch. The build-in comes with a lot of networks and libraries and stuff. You still need to build that framework before you start writing the code They try to come up with new features. I think they're in a very good space.

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 solution requires good understanding of Python, Pearl or Java and it's important to use the documentation. It would take a few hours of watching video sessions or reading the documentation to get started. It also helps to have an understanding of how API works, the architecture and how Selenium interacts with browsers. Having the background helps to design something with more features. I would rate this solution an eight out of 10.

I would advise others to only use Selenium in a unit test environment, and not an end test environment. It's very technical; you need a programmer and/or a developer to create your scripts. If you do not have development skills, then you will not be able to create scripts, at least in Selenium. I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

We're using the on-premises deployment model. It is an open-source solution and you are able to build vertically. There is also lots of support pertaining to Selenium such as videos on YouTube. It's very easy to integrate on different platforms. The solution is constantly being updated and advanced; it's very reactive and in a constant state of change. I'd rate it seven out of ten.

We use the on-premises deployment model. It's a mature product that has been on the market for ten years. I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

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.

I don’t see it as a company spending money on anything. I like to keep up with the market because I built my career around test automation. Most important criteria when selecting a vendor: * Ease of implementation * Ease of adaptability * How much skill set would be required to operate it. Can I take somebody with no programming background and get them up and running on it, or does it require a heavy-duty programming background?

Just go for it.