Going forward, one way BrowserStack could improve is by incorporating AI concepts to create tests automatically from provided URLs or user intentions, generating scripts without needing users to write automation scripts. This could include natural language prompting for both test creation and insights from results.

While pricing for BrowserStack is acceptable, usability could improve with easier onboarding and understanding of features. An AI-driven chat interface could simplify managing the entire product using natural language instead of manual settings adjustments in various sections.

In terms of improvements, they can make it snappier. Everything kind of works. They have locked down the phones, which is problematic because there are some test cases that require access to things that they don't give you access to, which is understandable. However, being able to have more granular access to the OS would be a good feature.

BrowserStack is very expensive and they keep increasing their cost, which is absolutely ridiculous, especially when someone like LambdaTest is coming through for literal thousands of dollars less, with the same services.

The amount of what LambdaTest has to offer for their price point seems to be a better financial choice for any company at this point. I haven't used LambdaTest yet; we are exploring options with other providers at this time, and LambdaTest has been the only one that's provided any kind of cost-saving benefit while not losing any of the functionality that we expect to have with these products.

BrowserStack is really expensive, which is super annoying. Anytime you want something new, it costs an exorbitant amount. We just attempted to increase our seats and they wanted almost double what we were paying, which was insane because it wasn't double the seats. Companies need to make money, but they also need to work with their customers because otherwise, they'll lose them to competitors like LambdaTest who offer similar services for significantly less.

I think false positives are an area where BrowserStack can improve, as I have often seen things working fine on actual devices, but on BrowserStack devices, issues arise due to network slowness or AWS region connectivity problems that cause lag.

In addition to false positives and network slowness, feature improvements could include monitoring dashboards or consolidated dashboards for multiple releases across different domains, allowing us to see runs scheduled and link us to reports of passed and failed cases.

I think a possible improvement for BrowserStack could be adding features such as sending SMS or making FaceTime calls because, as far as I know, those features are not available at the moment. Additionally, it could be useful to attach some virtual phone numbers for specific devices and also consider integrating Apple Pay payments to verify how the application works on those platforms.

I would see such features on BrowserStack. I know there are many options such as virtual credit cards, virtual phone numbers, or virtual Apple Pay or Google Pay, and it is possible, but I do not know why BrowserStack still has not implemented them.

I need to think about how BrowserStack can be improved. If your application is more adapted to tools like Jira, Trello, or Monday, it will be more widely used by testers in my opinion.

I feel there is not much to improve about BrowserStack.

I haven't seen AI in BrowserStack, making it in an area where improvements are required in the product. Accessibility testing is an area of concern where improvements are required.

The issue with the product stems from the fact that when we try to do a single or multiple login on multiple browsers for simulation in scenarios where users use Chrome, Mozilla, and Edge, all browsers are open at the same time, and login has to be done separately. My company has added a minimum of two and a maximum of five users to the license. In my company, when all of us start device testing at the same time, one of the devices stops working, or some slowness or lag happens. There is some stability issue in the product, making it in areas where improvements are required.

One of the challenges I've encountered with BrowserStack is related to connectivity issues. Occasionally, there are disruptions in the connection which can interfere with our testing processes, especially when testing on phones. Improving the connectivity stability would be beneficial for making BrowserStack an even better product in the next release, in my opinion.

We are having difficulty with the payment system for the BrowserStack team, as they only accept credit cards and we are encountering some issues.

I would like to have more online video demonstrations on how to use the solution.

It is difficult to use for someone who has little to no experience. We want to see the EZT for testers that can be easily applicable to solutions. It has been done in AWS, where you open the AWS docs and can download to read all the information about the features and supported languages. This will make it more comfortable for those without experience with the integration.

Regarding additional features, we would like an EZT for testers that can be easily applicable to their solutions. It has been done in AWS, where we just open the AWS docs and can download all the information about features and supported languages.

BrowserStack is deployed on cloud, and we have ten people using this solution in my organization. We completed the deployment in-house.

Sometimes BrowserStack is really slow and devices are not loading. it is really annoying and that's why we bought several newer devices because sometimes it's affecting us a lot.

There are times when the exact device does not exist with a specific iOS within BrowserStack. We're fully moving to iOS 15 and there are not many devices available with iOS 15. Those that are available are not available with other OS versions here.

It's good to have a custom setup but I understand that the testing starts with everything cleared, cookies, and incognito mode. In order to faster go through the SaaS process, it's better to have something with preset, such as when you visit the webpage on a certain date. This way, the testing is going to go faster for us. We would use it more extensively.

There are times when you're not clicking the right spot in your browser, such as the back button, and instead of using one within the browser window. We're testing a browser inside the browser and it could lead to some glitches, even though this is my mistake. I know it's my error. However, the user experience of the browser inside another browser could be improved. They could disable certain buttons or allow us to disable them.

While I was testing I was not 100% sure a that was properly mimicking the browsers or not. We had some issues with a browser, and the reason was the browser itself does not provide any support. If the local system does not provide any support, I think this was the problem. There should be better integration with other solutions, such as JIRA.

All the testing that I do is functional testing, such as UI testing is for mobile. I'm not sure whether it is allowing for desktop testing or not, but if it does not, they should add it for various desktop applications as well for us to have remote access.

One of the biggest issues with BrowserStack is that if you don't have your network set up by the book, it's hard to get it to work with local desk machines.

We had some execution issues, and you would like to move to the Sauce Labs. We are based out of India and need 100% bandwidth for testing. So, on some days, we have low bandwidth, and on other days a high bandwidth. So network issues could be improved to support our execution.

The solution can be improved by including local testing. We are struggling to do local testing because we are in the office, and we normally create issues when we test.

I've had issues removing the app from a device. 

There can be a delay in response from support sometimes. 

If you are inactive for 30 minutes, the solution will close.

BrowserStack operates at a slow pace, it could improve by making it faster.

Sometimes connectivity can be a problem. We will be in the middle of testing and we will lose connectivity sometimes. That is the biggest issue that I have seen. That is a stability issue within BrowserStack, not an issue with services.  

I have thought about features I would like to see included in the next release of the BrowserStack. I do not know if it is even possible to support this or not. Being able to test GPS within applications would be useful for us. What I mean by that is being able to do real-time testing based on your location. I do not know if BrowserStack could support that in emulations in a future release. Being able to emulate GPS positions during testing would be valuable for what we do and the clients we serve. For example, if we are doing something and need to do QA for a rideshare or delivery service the GPS testing would come into play.  

There is room for improvement in pricing. 

Stability is a feature that needs to be improved. Some of the issues found in BrowserStack are not as consistent as desired. I would like to see clearer visibility.

The solution is slow.

There are limitations to the product. For example, the only things that we could validate were APK files and IPA files. For them to support machines such as Windows and Mac, or if they could add more, that would be ideal.

The pricing is more expensive than other tools. 

BrowserStack could have a better price, but good things have a price.

Adding better integration with frameworks, particularly testing frameworks like Robot, would be of more value to customers and make their jobs easier.

Customer support could be better. We tried to implement and explore this product with the vendor or reseller's help, but we haven't had any good response about the product.

I would like for there to be more integration with BrowserStack and other platforms. One of our clients had Ranorex which is a solution that has a problem with automation on regional devices. It also provides record and play functionalities. Our client proposed integration with BrowserStack but it's not available. I would like for both web applications to be linked. There should be a solution for mobile-based automation. 

I would like application performance improvement to be better as, for me, it looked a bit slow. For example, loading one page sometime took 10-15 seconds.

Though, it has great build in functions and support , we found there is a room for improvement mainly.

The real challenges I noticed when I ran few tests with Test NG :

• Unable to see the remote view while testing on real iOS devices - when we run the automation scripts, we do not see the real execution on mobile devices in a snapshot view but at the moment we only see text and visual logs for these devices.
• File upload to run tests on mobile devices (real iOS devices, iOS simulators (iPhoneDriver) - upload a local file from local machine while executing the test. This functionality is only supported on the desktop browsers.
• BrowserStack does not support file upload for automation - the WebDriver used to run tests on mobile devices (real iOS devices in beta (Appium), iOS simulators (iPhoneDriver) and Android emulators (AndroidDriver)) do not support this feature. Thus, we are not be able to test file uploads on mobile devices.

I used it for a week an half. As I used it for compatibility testing only. I used it for mobile browsers as well as desktop browsers for different OS.

Maybe advertise more? I know there are companies out there that would benefit greatly from your products.

In terms of improvement, BrowserStack should work on its Internet connectivity although issues only occur occasionally.