We performed a comparison between BrowserStack and Parasoft SOAtest based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Functional Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Testing across devices and browsers without maintaining that inventory is invaluable."
"The product's initial setup phase was not very difficult."
"We like the model device factory for iOS and Android devices."
"It's helpful for me to test on different devices."
"The most valuable feature of BrowserStack is the ability to do manual testing."
"The most valuable features are the variety of tools available."
"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."
"Local testing for products with no public exposure is an advantage in development."
"Automatic testing is the most valuable feature."
"Since the solution has both command line and automation options, it generates good reports."
"Good write and read files which save execution inputs and outputs and can be stored locally."
"They have a feature where they can record traffic and create tests on the report traffic."
"We have seen a return on investment."
"We do a lot of web services testing and REST services testing. That is the focus of this product."
"Parasoft SOAtest has improved the quality of our automated web services, which can be easily implemented through service chaining and service virtualization."
"The solution is scalable."
"BrowserStack operates at a slow pace, it could improve by making it faster."
"It is difficult to use for someone who has little to no experience."
"There is some stability issue in the product, making it in areas where improvements are required."
"I haven't seen AI in BrowserStack, making it in an area where improvements are required in the product."
"Occasionally, there are disruptions in the connection which can interfere with our testing processes, especially when testing on phones."
"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 is room for improvement in pricing."
"We are struggling to do local testing."
"Reporting facilities can be better."
"The product is very slow to start up, and that is a bit of a problem, actually."
"Tuning the tool takes time because it gives quite a long list of warnings."
"The performance could be a bit better."
"Compatibility with HTTP 1.1 and TLS 1.2 needs to be improved."
"Parasoft SOAtest has an internal refresh function where you can refresh the software to show the changes you’ve made in your projects. Unfortunately this function does not work properly, because it often does not show the changes after you’ve hit te refresh button a few times."
"The summary reports could be improved."
"The feedback that we received from the DevOps of our organization was that the tool was a little heavy from the transformation perspective."
BrowserStack is ranked 4th in Functional Testing Tools with 25 reviews while Parasoft SOAtest is ranked 24th in Functional Testing Tools with 30 reviews. BrowserStack is rated 8.0, while Parasoft SOAtest is rated 8.2. 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 Parasoft SOAtest writes "Reliable with a good interface but uses too much memory". BrowserStack is most compared with LambdaTest, Sauce Labs, Perfecto, Tricentis Tosca and Bitbar, whereas Parasoft SOAtest is most compared with Postman, SonarQube, Coverity, Polyspace Code Prover and Klocwork. See our BrowserStack vs. Parasoft SOAtest report.
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.
