We performed a comparison between CrossBrowserTesting and OpenText Business Processing Testing based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Tricentis, OpenText, Perforce and others in Functional Testing Tools."When developing new pages that have questionable functionality or coding, we will often use CBT to test it in a browser. CBT works with our testing environment and development site."
"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 can run a page through the screenshot tool, then send a URL with the results to my team."
"The screen shot portal is essential for an easy way to run tests across hundreds of browsers and retrieve screenshots which then indicate success or failure."
"Video recording of the script running in a cloud server."
"SmartBear has excellent, informative webinars, so keep an eye out for those."
"This solution helps lower the overhead cost associated with buying multiple devices."
"Selenium Grid allows testing multiple platforms to insure functionality for most users."
"The solution is quite stable with SAP. It's nice. I use it extensively."
"This solution is very helpful to me. I use it to execute my use cases without a manual interface."
"The speed connection in mobile devices could be improved, because sometimes the load time is uncertain."
"It would be useful if we can run the live-testing test cases on multiple platforms at the same time, instead of waiting for one session to finish."
"The five minute timeouts can cause irritation if you have just popped away to consult some supporting documentation."
"We had some issues with the onboarding process and the cloud conductivity could improve."
"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."
"A problem that we are facing quite often is related to the network connection. Tests can fail if the remote CrossBrowserTesting's VM has connection problems. This happens mostly with browsers of Internet Explorer family which work on Windows OS."
"This solution would benefit from faster testing and support for more devices."
"Sometimes, some of their instances fail, particularly in older versions of browsers."
"There's only one thing that I think needs improvement. When I started off using this solution, I used the Google search engine to learn how to use the tool. I would also check with my colleagues who have a lot of knowledge about it. Selenium has fields of information available. If you click on that field there will be an explanation about how to use the tool. It will be very easier to understand it if Micro Focus included this feature. It is easy to find with the search button, but it would be a great help to the users who are new to this tool."
"The solution shouldn't be so tightly integrated with the ALM tool that they have. It should have its own base rather than the repository."
CrossBrowserTesting is ranked 28th in Functional Testing Tools while OpenText Business Processing Testing is ranked 37th in Functional Testing Tools. CrossBrowserTesting is rated 9.0, while OpenText Business Processing Testing is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of CrossBrowserTesting writes "Static screenshots are the feature most often used, because they are a simple method of detecting problems". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText Business Processing Testing writes "Excellent usability, but the solution shouldn't be so tightly integrated with their ALM tool". CrossBrowserTesting is most compared with BrowserStack, Bitbar, Tricentis Tosca, LambdaTest and Sauce Labs, whereas OpenText Business Processing Testing 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.