BrowserStack vs Galen Framework comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
BrowserStack Logo
8,670 views|6,779 comparisons
100% willing to recommend
Galen Framework Logo
249 views|102 comparisons
100% willing to recommend
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between BrowserStack and Galen Framework based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Perforce and others in Functional Testing Tools.
To learn more, read our detailed Functional Testing Tools Report (Updated: April 2024).
769,236 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"I have found that BrowserStack is stable.""It's helpful for me to test on different devices.""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.""The product guides and resources are extensive and very helpful.""BrowserStack's best feature is browser testing across different platforms, including mobile.""I've worked on testing integrations with BrowserStack, particularly with a platform called IT. This involves testing the registration process, including receiving verification codes on devices and phones. BrowserStack has been excellent for testing these integrations, providing a seamless workflow development experience.""The product's initial setup phase was not very difficult.""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."

More BrowserStack Pros →

"What I like most about Galen Framework are its advantages, particularly its spec language and the spec file feature."

More Galen Framework Pros →

Cons
"Connectivity can sometimes mar the testing experience.""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.""The solution is slow.""We had some execution issues.""It is difficult to use for someone who has little to no experience.""I would like for there to be more integration with BrowserStack and other platforms.""There is some stability issue in the product, making it in areas where improvements are required.""BrowserStack should work on its Internet connectivity although issues only occur occasionally."

More BrowserStack Cons →

"There don't seem to be functions available for automatically generating Galen values based on the specifications in the spec file, and this could be a potential improvement for Galen Framework."

More Galen Framework Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "This solution costs less than competing products."
  • "The price is fine."
  • "There are different licenses available that can be customized. You can select the features that you want only to use which can be a cost-benefit."
  • "BrowserStack could have a better price, but good things have a price."
  • "The price of BrowserStack is high."
  • "Compared to other solutions, BrowserStack is one of the cheapest."
  • "My company found the product's license to be very compatible with our budget, and we pay 5,000 to 10,000 per year for licenses."
  • "As for pricing, I can't provide a clear evaluation as I'm not directly involved in those discussions."
  • More BrowserStack Pricing and Cost Advice →

    Information Not Available
    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
    769,236 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:The product's initial setup phase was not very difficult.
    Top Answer:My company found the product's license to be very compatible with our budget, and we pay 5,000 to 10,000 per year for licenses.
    Top Answer: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.
    Top Answer:What I like most about Galen Framework are its advantages, particularly its spec language and the spec file feature.
    Top Answer:Galen Framework does not have any additional costs after the product is purchased.
    Top Answer:I haven't found any specific areas for modernization or improvement in Galen Framework yet. However, one observation I have made is about the auto-generation of Galen files. While this feature exists… more »
    Ranking
    4th
    Views
    8,670
    Comparisons
    6,779
    Reviews
    14
    Average Words per Review
    372
    Rating
    8.0
    25th
    Views
    249
    Comparisons
    102
    Reviews
    1
    Average Words per Review
    376
    Rating
    8.0
    Comparisons
    Learn More
    Galen Framework
    Video Not Available
    Overview
    BrowserStack is a cloud-based cross-browser testing tool that enables developers to test their websites across various browserson different operating systems and mobile devices, without requiring users to install virtual machines, devices or emulators.

    Layout testing seemed always a complex task. Galen Framework offers a simple solution: test location of objects relatively to each other on page. Using a special syntax and comprehensive rules you can describe any layout you can imagine.

    Galen Framework runs well in Selenium Grid. You can set up your tests to run in a cloud like Sauce Labs or BrowserStack so that you can even test your responsive websites on different mobile devices. Galen can run multiple tests in parallel which is also a nice time saver.

    Galen Framework is designed with responsivness in mind. It is easy to set up a test for different browser sizes. Galen just opens a browser, resizes it to a defined size and then tests the page according to specifications.

    Sample Customers
    Microsoft, RBS, jQuery, Expedia, Citrix, AIG
    Information Not Available
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Computer Software Company55%
    Financial Services Firm18%
    Manufacturing Company9%
    Marketing Services Firm9%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company16%
    Financial Services Firm14%
    Manufacturing Company7%
    Retailer7%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm15%
    Energy/Utilities Company12%
    Computer Software Company12%
    Healthcare Company10%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business30%
    Midsize Enterprise26%
    Large Enterprise43%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business18%
    Midsize Enterprise15%
    Large Enterprise67%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business14%
    Midsize Enterprise8%
    Large Enterprise78%
    Buyer's Guide
    Functional Testing Tools
    April 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Perforce and others in Functional Testing Tools. Updated: April 2024.
    769,236 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    BrowserStack is ranked 4th in Functional Testing Tools with 25 reviews while Galen Framework is ranked 25th in Functional Testing Tools with 2 reviews. BrowserStack is rated 8.0, while Galen Framework is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of BrowserStack writes "Good in the area of automation and offers a high test coverage to users". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Galen Framework writes "Scalable with strong reporting capabilities". BrowserStack is most compared with LambdaTest, Sauce Labs, Perfecto, CrossBrowserTesting and Tricentis Tosca, whereas Galen Framework is most compared with .

    See our list of best Functional 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.