BrowserStack vs Inflectra Rapise comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
BrowserStack Logo
8,712 views|6,797 comparisons
100% willing to recommend
Inflectra Logo
254 views|143 comparisons
85% willing to recommend
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between BrowserStack and Inflectra Rapise 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).
768,578 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
"The integration is very good.""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.""I have found that BrowserStack is stable.""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 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 most valuable feature is that it provides parallel and cross-browser testing. It enables us to run tests on multiple browsers or devices simultaneously.""Maintenance of the solution is easy.""Testing across devices and browsers without maintaining that inventory is invaluable."

More BrowserStack Pros →

"The most valuable feature of the solution is its versatility.""We always use the product for end-to-end automation test cases.""It's pretty straightforward to set up."

More Inflectra Rapise Pros →

Cons
"I haven't seen AI in BrowserStack, making it in an area where improvements are required in the product.""I would like for there to be more integration with BrowserStack and other platforms.""We are struggling to do local testing.""I would like to see clearer visibility.""The solution is slow.""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.""Connectivity can sometimes mar the testing experience.""Occasionally, there are disruptions in the connection which can interfere with our testing processes, especially when testing on phones."

More BrowserStack Cons →

"Inflectra Rapise needs to expand its ability.""It would be good if there could be more integration of Inflectra Rapise, since not all customers use the same tool for test management and automation integration.""The maintenance is very difficult. We've only been using the platform for three months, so I'm not sure if that will continue, but right now it's an observation I've had."

More Inflectra Rapise 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 →

  • "We pay no more than $50 annually for support of each one of the licenses."
  • "I rate the product's price an eight on a scale of one to ten, where ten means very good pricing."
  • More Inflectra Rapise Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.
    768,578 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:With respect to pricing, they are a bit expensive. I would rate the licensing model a six out of ten, where one is expensive, and ten is cheap. So, the price could be a bit decreased.
    Top Answer: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… more »
    Top Answer:The most valuable feature of the solution is its versatility.
    Top Answer:I rate the product's price an eight on a scale of one to ten, where ten means very good pricing.
    Top Answer:Inflectra Rapise needs to expand its ability. I spoke with Inflectra's executive account rep on the need to expand the tool's ability. The problem with Inflectra Rapise is that a lot of companies are… more »
    Ranking
    5th
    Views
    8,712
    Comparisons
    6,797
    Reviews
    12
    Average Words per Review
    353
    Rating
    7.9
    22nd
    Views
    254
    Comparisons
    143
    Reviews
    1
    Average Words per Review
    1,079
    Rating
    4.0
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Rapise
    Learn More
    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.
    Rapise is the most powerful and easy to use test automation tool on the market. It allows you to quickly and easily automate the testing of your web, mobile and desktop applications. Why spend hours manually regression testing your applications when you can have Rapise do it for you?
    Sample Customers
    Microsoft, RBS, jQuery, Expedia, Citrix, AIG
    - Soflab - RegEd - Intel - US Government
    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
    Computer Software Company21%
    Educational Organization13%
    Government11%
    Manufacturing Company10%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business30%
    Midsize Enterprise26%
    Large Enterprise43%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business18%
    Midsize Enterprise15%
    Large Enterprise67%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business50%
    Midsize Enterprise25%
    Large Enterprise25%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business10%
    Midsize Enterprise20%
    Large Enterprise70%
    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.
    768,578 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    BrowserStack is ranked 5th in Functional Testing Tools with 25 reviews while Inflectra Rapise is ranked 22nd in Test Automation Tools with 7 reviews. BrowserStack is rated 8.0, while Inflectra Rapise is rated 7.2. 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 Inflectra Rapise writes "The tool needs to improve in the areas of security, though it is a versatile product". BrowserStack is most compared with LambdaTest, Sauce Labs, Perfecto, CrossBrowserTesting and Bitbar, whereas Inflectra Rapise is most compared with Katalon Studio.

    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.