CrossBrowserTesting vs IBM DevOps Test UI comparison

CrossBrowserTesting

Read 19 CrossBrowserTesting reviews

1,182 Views
880 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

IBM DevOps Test UI

Read 8 IBM DevOps Test UI reviews

1,216 Views
707 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

CrossBrowserTesting

IBM DevOps Test UI

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between CrossBrowserTesting and IBM DevOps Test UI 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.

To learn more, read our detailed CrossBrowserTesting vs. IBM DevOps Test UI Report (Updated: May 2024).

Buyer's Guide

CrossBrowserTesting vs. IBM DevOps Test UI

May 2024

Download the complete report

Helped 787,779 peers since 2012

Categories and Ranking

CrossBrowserTesting

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

28th

Average Rating

9.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

IBM DevOps Test UI

Ranking in Functional Testing Tools

22nd

Average Rating

7.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Regression Testing Tools (10th)

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2024, in the Functional Testing Tools category, the mindshare of CrossBrowserTesting is 0.7%, down from 1.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM DevOps Test UI is 0.4%, down from 1.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Functional Testing Tools

Unique Categories:

No other categories found

Regression Testing Tools

0.4%

Featured Reviews

Michael Hutchison

Web Specialist at Mayo Clinic

Jul 7, 2020

Static screenshots are the feature most often used, because they are a simple method of detecting problems

When developing new pages that have questionable functionality or coding, we will often use CBT to test it in a variety of browsers and devices. CBT works with our testing environment and development site. Our greatest concern is universal appearance and functionality, thus we test a great many…

Read full review

Hellen Zhang

Lead Systems Tester at Government of Ontario, Canada

Aug 15, 2022

Reliable test automation, and test data creation with efficient support

The solution is used for test automation, and test data creation The solution has provided more accurate results with database verification. Test automation is most valuable because it saves a lot of time. The solution can be improved by removing the need for object matching in the framework.…

Read full review

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros

"SmartBear has excellent, informative webinars, so keep an eye out for those."

"The extensive range of products available to simulate is something I have come to appreciate as it has resulted in an ability to broaden the scope of our tests."

"I am able to continuously test my new releases across browser versions without issues."

"Record and Replay is the most used functionality for us, as we can record the test cases and play them on multiple combinations of platforms."

"This solution helps lower the overhead cost associated with buying multiple devices."

"I have found CrossBrowserTesting to be scalable."

"With screenshots, I can quickly verify a page looks universally good in minutes."

"The features that I find most useful and the ones that I use the most are local site testing, device and browser testing, and screenshots."

More CrossBrowserTesting pros

"Test automation is most valuable because it saves a lot of time."

"The most valuable feature is the UI component tester."

"It is compatible with all sorts of Dark Net applications. Its coverage is very good."

"IBM Rational Functional Tester is very contextual."

Cons

"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."

"The "Getting Started" documentation for Selenium testing could be improved."

"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."

"This solution would benefit from faster testing and support for more devices."

"The speed connection in mobile devices could be improved, because sometimes the load time is uncertain."

"I have experienced some lagging issues, and it does not seem like all of the testing environments are configured the same."

"We had some issues with the onboarding process and the cloud conductivity could improve."

"Elements of 'real' mobile/tablet testing could be sped up."

More CrossBrowserTesting cons

"As many of our products are moving from PC to mobile, the most important thing that this solution needs is mobile app support."

"They need to do a complete revamp so that even a non-technical person can manage the tool."

"The latest version has increased load time before testing can be run."

"If the solution is running on Linux, there are some issues around application compatibility."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"CrossBrowserTesting offered the best value for its price."

"The lowest price point is very reasonable. It is also useful if only one person in the company needs to check on the browser display."

"SmartBear offers bundles of products that work together."

"A few intermediary pricing options for small QA teams would be nice, e.g., unlimited screenshots, "as you need it" parallel tests, etc."

"It is worth the pricing as the product is supported on multiple platforms and browsers."

"Licensing is good but the prices for the products are expensive. A single-user license may go for something like $10,000 to $30,000. There are no additional costs, and support is included within that price."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Functional Testing Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

787,779 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

21%

Financial Services Firm

15%

Government

Media Company

Computer Software Company

23%

Financial Services Firm

18%

Energy/Utilities Company

Insurance Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

What do you like most about IBM Rational Functional Tester?

Test automation is most valuable because it saves a lot of time.

See all answers

What needs improvement with IBM Rational Functional Tester?

The solution can be improved by removing the need for object matching in the framework. The latest version has increased load time before testing can be run. The reason is that changes were made to...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for IBM Rational Functional Tester?

The solution is used for test automation, and test data creation.

See all answers

Comparisons

BrowserStack vs CrossBrowserTesting

Compared 51% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs CrossBrowserTesting

Compared 18% of the time

Bitbar vs CrossBrowserTesting

Compared 17% of the time

LambdaTest vs CrossBrowserTesting

Compared 8% of the time

Automai AppVerify vs CrossBrowserTesting

Compared 6% of the time

More CrossBrowserTesting Competitors

Katalon Studio vs IBM DevOps Test UI

Compared 21% of the time

Tricentis Tosca vs IBM DevOps Test UI

Compared 21% of the time

Selenium HQ vs IBM DevOps Test UI

Compared 18% of the time

HCL OneTest vs IBM DevOps Test UI

Compared 17% of the time

Worksoft Certify vs IBM DevOps Test UI

Compared 11% of the time

More IBM DevOps Test UI Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

CrossBrowserTesting

June 2024

Download CrossBrowserTesting product report

Buyer's Guide

Functional Testing Tools

May 2024

Download IBM DevOps Test UI product report

Also Known As

No data available

IBM Rational Functional Tester

Learn More

SmartBear

Video not available

IBM

Overview

CrossBrowserTesting is a cloud testing platform that gives instant access to 1500+ different real desktop and mobile browsers for testers, developers, and designers.

Native debugging tools make manual testing easy to inspect and correct HTML, CSS, and JavaScript errors on any browser.
Take automated screenshots across multiple browsers at once, then compare side-by-side against historical test runs.

IBM DevOps Test UI, also known as Rational Functional Tester, is a software tool designed for automated functional and regression testing of Graphical User Interfaces (GUIs) and data-driven testing. It automates the testing process to ensure application functionalities work as intended and identifies any issues caused by new code changes. The tool is tailored for GUI testing, allowing for easy recording and playback of test cases that interact with UI elements like buttons and menus. It supports data-driven testing, enabling comprehensive tests across various data sets. Additionally, it offers visual editing features with screenshot representations for easy test creation and ScriptAssure technology to maintain test scripts even if the UI changes.

Sample Customers

St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Accenture, Sony, Los Angeles Times, ADP, Verizon, T-Mobile, Wistia

Edumate

Buyer's Guide

CrossBrowserTesting vs. IBM DevOps Test UI

May 2024

Free Report: CrossBrowserTesting vs. IBM DevOps Test UI

Find out what your peers are saying about CrossBrowserTesting vs. IBM DevOps Test UI and other solutions. Updated: May 2024.

DOWNLOAD NOW

787,779 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our CrossBrowserTesting vs. IBM DevOps Test UI 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.