We performed a comparison between BrowserStack and Worksoft Certify 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."Local testing for products with no public exposure is an advantage in development."
"It's helpful for me to test on different devices."
"It is a scalable solution."
"The product guides and resources are extensive and very helpful."
"The most valuable features are the variety of tools available."
"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."
"It is a stable solution. There's no lagging and jittering."
"Maintenance of the solution is easy."
"What I found most valuable in Worksoft Certify is its identification feature. I also found its automation feature valuable."
"We were able to use Worksoft to automate all of the actions that we would have to take after an SAP refresh. This way we do the refresh, then that night or right afterwards, we run the Worksoft script and it resets all of our testing users. This sets them up with the right access, the right approvals, and just sets up everything on the back-end so we can do our scripts the next night."
"Provides all the in-built functionalities and is a wonderful tool."
"People who don't have coding knowledge are capable of doing automation with Certify. It reduces coding and scripting dependencies."
"It is very user-friendly with an appealing UI, unlike a lot of other automation tools that we have evaluated. The fact that it can be used to across SAP and non-SAP applications (including web-based apps) is a big advantage. Using Certify Process Capture functionality has helped in hassle free test design creation, without the need to spend any extra effort to capture test steps and screenshots. The integration elements across HPE ALM and Solution Manager also work well."
"Improvement means for us that we have to be better in quality. Due to automation, you can run every automated test case twice a week. If you do it manually, you do it once per release. This is a quality improvement."
"With Worksoft, we have been able to automate six of our smoke tests in four months."
"It is very easy to maintain. With scripts, I can change one line and in one step. Whatever I want, I can do. I don't need to be an expert to use it."
"BrowserStack operates at a slow pace, it could improve by making it faster."
"The solution is slow."
"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."
"BrowserStack is scalable, but cost is significant for those living in Mexico."
"Connectivity can sometimes mar the testing experience."
"We had some execution issues."
"BrowserStack should work on its Internet connectivity although issues only occur occasionally."
"We are struggling to do local testing."
"Worksoft Certify needs improvement on customization of reporting and how you report final outcomes."
"Performance on the web UI part, especially with some of the more comprehensive Fiori features, like the complex tables that are being used, could be improved. In those cases we have noticed a lot of execution-time increase with regards to the Certify solution."
"We can use it for the web application, but we are facing stability-related challenges. The properties are getting changed. For example, when I am performing any operation on the text box but the development team has done some changes, our Worksoft scripts are getting changed. This is the main challenge that we are facing while developing tests for the web application in Worksoft Certify, where any changes in the backend are indirectly impacting our scripts. For the web application, there is a scarcity of resources. Unlike an SAP application that doesn't require much experience, for the web application, you require experienced people."
"Certify is integrated with Solution Manager, but this integration could be easier."
"Worksoft Certify's support team should respond more promptly when we are stuck with certain issues and looking for a solution."
"It is very easy to use, but there are some places where they need to improve their security. E.g., the BPP tool is just a URL, which does not ask you for a username and password. Anyone can login and can see it."
"I would like BPP to have more filtering options during the report creation. This would make our customers happy."
"Worksoft Certify needs a bit of improvement for its web-based processes. It can be difficult because you need to recall the maps, then you still have to add-on for your browser. When you are using the browser-based testing, you cannot even move your mouse or do anything on your system when you are using the web-based testing. Therefore, it needs a bit of improvement on that side. While it does work, it needs improvement. From the SAP side, there is nothing better than Worksoft Certify. However, from the web-based, we are moving towards Fiori. SAP will soon be totally web-based. For Fiori, they need to be great with SAP testing. Thus, Worksoft has to improve the web-based testing part for Certify."
BrowserStack is ranked 5th in Functional Testing Tools with 23 reviews while Worksoft Certify is ranked 6th in Functional Testing Tools with 64 reviews. BrowserStack is rated 8.0, while Worksoft Certify is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of BrowserStack writes "A user-friendly tool for performance testing". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Worksoft Certify writes "Enables us to automate end-to-end testing of our integration between S/4HANA and Salesforce.com". BrowserStack is most compared with LambdaTest, Sauce Labs, Perfecto, CrossBrowserTesting and Bitbar, whereas Worksoft Certify is most compared with Tricentis Tosca, Selenium HQ, OpenText UFT One, Katalon Studio and Panaya Test Dynamix. See our BrowserStack vs. Worksoft Certify 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.