Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Appium vs Qt Squish comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Appium
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
30
Ranking in other categories
Mobile Development Platforms (7th), Regression Testing Tools (6th)
Qt Squish
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
20
Ranking in other categories
Test Automation Tools (8th)
 

Featured Reviews

Luis Gerardo Meneses Hernandez - PeerSpot reviewer
Allows for direct interaction with an application's DOM but complex configuration
What I like about Appium right now is that it's like Cypress in the sense that I can get to the new DOM of the application and select the components and create the functions to test the components in the way I want them to be tested. That's why I like it right now.
Luc Vangrunderbeeck - PeerSpot reviewer
Testing solution supports Java testing with good reliability
There is nothing you can do for almost every application. If you do it for a single version, it is rather easy. However, if you want to run it for different versions of the software, then you need the Qt version of Java. You need to set up some special environment variables to be able to do that.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"What I like about Appium right now is that it's like Cypress in the sense that............. to test the components in the way I want them to be tested."
"The latest versions of the solution are stable."
"We do not need to pay for the solution. It’s free."
"Obviously because of automation, it reduces manual testing efforts."
"The most valuable feature of Appium is it supports iOS and AOS and is open-source."
"The most valuable features of Appium are the in-built functionality, which we can use in our code. For example, move back, move front, navigate one page before, and navigate one page ahead. You can do this by using the in-built functions from Appium."
"The solution helps with test automation. We focus mostly on Java."
"It's an open-source solution with a very large community and available documentation."
"I can perform Java SWT."
"Squish is integrated with Qt, which enables us to test the user interface effectively."
"froglogic Squish is one of the most desired solutions if you are having a Qt as a framework and if you are looking at GUI regression testing. froglogic is a part of Qt as a company."
"I find it very user-friendly and easy to start working with. The main benefit for me is that it allows testing applications developed in the Qt language. This capability makes Squish a game-changer, as it's the only tool I've found that enables automation for applications written in Qt. I appreciate three main aspects. Firstly, the documentation is excellent. Secondly, I value the way the tool efficiently locates elements during testing. These are the two aspects I particularly like."
"The initial setup process is straightforward."
"I like the dashboard. It's virtual, and you can see the customer results. I can do it at night and in the morning. I think it also automatically emails results."
"This product can work with QT applications and cross-cut from them on Windows or Mac."
"It is very stable."
 

Cons

"Appium can improve when the case fails, there should be a feature where you can generate the report from Appium. Once you're on a test case, automatically the screenshot should be captured which would avoid manual intervention. These features would be beneficial to migrate to Appium."
"The challenging part with Appium is that installation can be a bit tricky. It can be challenging to set up in Android versus iOS environments."
"Configuration-wise, there is a lot of room for improvement."
"If it had more facility for configuration it would be a spectacular solution."
"The initial setup is straightforward if you have previous experience with the solution, but it can be complicated for a novice user."
"We need some bug fixes for nested elements."
"They should add an in-built framework."
"What needs improvement in Appium is its documentation. It needs to give more context on the libraries that Appium is using under the hood. For example, my team is using Appium for Android automation, and a lot of times, I feel that there's functionality that's available through the Appium interface, that exists within the UIAutomator, but there aren't a lot of useful or helpful resources on the internet to find that information, so it would be good to have some linkage with the underlying platform itself. Another room for improvement in Appium is that it's buggy sometimes. For example, at times, there's a bug in the inspector application that doesn't allow me to save my desired capability set, so it would be nice to get that bug fixed, but overall, Appium is a good tool. The Touch Actions functionality in Appium also needs improvement. For example, if I want to initiate a scroll on the device that I'm running Appium on, sometimes Swipe works, but in other situations, I have to explicitly use action chains, so I'm not too sure what's the better approach. What I'd like to see in the next version of Appium is a more intelligent and more intuitive AppiumLibrary, in terms of identifying menus and scroll bars, etc., because right now, I'm unsure if I have to do a lot of export reversals to get to the elements I'm looking for. It would be nice to have some functionality built in, which would allow me to easily get those exports."
"You need to set up some special environment variables."
"We encountered issues with the embedded environment and building for the Qt version."
"ID could be improved with suggestions of names, variables or class."
"The price could be better."
"There had been a lot of improvements with froglogic Squish already. There were some scenarios in which this particular solution was available in different flavors. They have pulled everything together in one solution. There were some monitoring systems, which were missing out from the solution earlier. They have a centralized dashboard for monitoring the test cases and their execution. It's a full-blown solution, there are not many glitches in terms of something missing out of the package."
"The platform could be improved by implementing some basic functionalities that are frequently used, such as login procedures and screen handling when multiple screens are used at the workplace."
"I'm relatively new to Squish, so I'm not familiar with all its pros and cons. Currently, I haven't identified any specific improvements. However, one feature I miss is Git integration within the tool. In my previous experience with Selenium and Python in PyCharm, it was straightforward to create and review changes before pushing them. I haven't found a similar option in Squish, and having an integrated tool for managing conflicts would be beneficial in certain scenarios where collaboration is involved."
"Support isn't always helpful. I sometimes need to find solutions myself."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is free."
"The solution is open source."
"I'm unsure if there's any cost associated with Appium. I got the free package which includes the server GUI application and the inspector application, and it was free to download, and that's all I need to get my work done. I'm not aware of any additional costs associated with the tool."
"There is no license for this solution because it is open-source."
"Appian is open-source, which is not licensed."
"The pricing of Appium is fine."
"It's completely 100% free, and there are no hidden fees."
"This is an open source solution so it does not cost anything for licensing or otherwise."
"It is expensive."
"The platform is highly-priced."
"The price could be better. I believe each developer license costs about 6000 or 7000 Euros per year."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Regression Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
861,524 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
20%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Retailer
6%
Manufacturing Company
21%
Computer Software Company
16%
Healthcare Company
8%
Transportation Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

Do you recommend Appium?
I do recommend Appium. It is an open-source solution and completely free of charge. We use Appium and Appium Studio as our base for any type of mobile automation for testing. It has a great interfa...
What do you like most about Appium?
Appium helps me to do as much as much as I want to.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Appium?
My experience with Appium from a pricing perspective is favorable due to it being open source, making it a cost-effective option.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for froglogic Squish?
I'm aware of the price from three or four years ago, and it depends on the number of users. For the developer license, it is about $5200 a year.
What needs improvement with froglogic Squish?
There is nothing you can do for almost every application. If you do it for a single version, it is rather easy. However, if you want to run it for different versions of the software, then you need ...
What is your primary use case for froglogic Squish?
I am not really using the solution during development, however, for regression and automatic regression tests, I am using it. I use it to do visual Qt, which focuses on the GUI part of the applicat...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
froglogic Squish
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Nuvizz, Coupa Software, Eventbrite, Evernote
Google, Nokia, Pfizer, Siemens, Synopsys, Airbus, Boeing, Mercedes Benz, Disney, Shell, Reuters, Vodafone, XILINX, GE, Ericsson
Find out what your peers are saying about Appium vs. Qt Squish and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
861,524 professionals have used our research since 2012.