"Testing across devices and browsers without maintaining that inventory is invaluable."
"It just added some flexibility. There was nothing that improved our coding standards, etc. because all of our UIs were functional before we tried it."
"BrowserStack has lots of devices to choose from."
"I like that it offers full device capability."
"Local testing for products with no public exposure is an advantage in development."
"The setup was quite simple. The website easily explains how to set it up and if you want to integrate it with BMP tools there are online simple step tutorials."
"The main core concept behind this product is, it takes the overhead of maintaining all of your devices or particular computers. It continuously adds the latest devices that are coming into the market."
"The product guides and resources are extensive and very helpful."
"When developing new pages that have questionable functionality or coding, we will often use CBT to test it in a browser. CBT works with our testing environment and development site."
"Each new session started with the live testing feature allows for a cleared browser and new experience to be able to not only see these attributes on the page clearly but also pass clean data."
"I have found CrossBrowserTesting to be scalable."
"I can run a page through the screenshot tool, then send a URL with the results to my team."
"Adding better integration with frameworks, particularly testing frameworks like Robot, would be of more value to customers and make their jobs easier."
"I would like for there to be more integration with BrowserStack and other platforms."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"Connectivity can sometimes mar the testing experience."
"We had some issues with the onboarding process and the cloud conductivity could improve."
"The screenshot tool defaults to a screen layout instead of a full page test. I find it a bit cumbersome that I can't have it run a full screenshot as my default."
"Being able to test on real devices via the virtual connection is wonderful, but it can cause some lag and load time issues while testing."
BrowserStack is ranked 10th in Functional Testing Tools with 6 reviews while CrossBrowserTesting is ranked 17th in Functional Testing Tools with 3 reviews. BrowserStack is rated 7.8, while CrossBrowserTesting is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of BrowserStack writes "Test against a huge range of device and browser combinations but expect some connectivity issues". On the other hand, the top reviewer of CrossBrowserTesting writes "Live testing gives us the ability to identify potential issues on different browsers and devices proving to be a very useful tool". BrowserStack is most compared with Perfecto, Sauce Labs, LambdaTest, Tricentis Tosca and Bitbar, whereas CrossBrowserTesting is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Sauce Labs, LambdaTest, Bitbar and SmartBear TestComplete. See our BrowserStack vs. CrossBrowserTesting report.
See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors and best Regression Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Functional Testing Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
