We performed a comparison between Eggplant Performance and Selenium HQ based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache, OpenText, Tricentis and others in Performance Testing Tools."It is not a conventional test automation tool. It uses optical character recognition (OCR) to identify objects. It makes it the best in the class."
"We find the solution stable and scalable."
"We don't have a big team of people that can watch the dials and check that everything is okay. We're doing a lot of the monitoring of our website and our product at the side of the desk. We need a solution that does a lot for us, and that's what Eggplant does."
"Since Selenium HQ has multiple plug-ins, we can use it with multiple tools and multiple languages."
"The stability and performance are good."
"Its biggest advantage is that it is very customizable."
"You can build your own framework. I think that's the most powerful feature. You can connect with a lot of other tools that use frameworks, or keywords, etc. That helps make it a stronger solution."
"The most valuable features of Selenium HQ are it is open-source, has a good interface, and integrates well."
"The solution is very flexible; there are different ways of using it. It's open-source and has a lot of support on offer."
"We can run multiple projects at the same time and we can design both types of framework, including data-driven or hybrid. We have got a lot of flexibility here."
"Selenium has helped to complete tests in less time, which would not be possible relying on manual testing only."
"Performance is one key area for improvement. It can be slower compared to other tools I've used."
"I'd like to see the ability to integrate the user experience through device forms like AWS device forms or source labs."
"I would like to see some reporting or test management tools."
"We'd like to see some more image management in future releases."
"It is not a licensed tool. The problem with that is that it won't be able to support Windows desktop applications. There is no support for Windows desktop applications. They can do something about it. Its user interface can also be improved, which is not great compared to the other latest tools. Anybody who has been working on functional testing or manual testing cannot directly work on Selenium HQ without learning programming skills, which is a disadvantage."
"There should be standardized frameworks to build automation."
"I would like for the next release to support parallel testing."
"Could have additional readability and abstraction."
"If the test scenarios are not subdivided correctly, it is very likely that maintenance will become very expensive and re-use is unlikely."
"Katalon has built a UI on top of Selenium to make it more user-friendly, as well as repository options and the ability to create repositories for objects, among other things. It would be helpful if this type of information could be included in the Selenium tool itself, so people wouldn't have to do filing testing."
Eggplant Performance is ranked 15th in Performance Testing Tools with 4 reviews while Selenium HQ is ranked 5th in Functional Testing Tools with 102 reviews. Eggplant Performance is rated 7.8, while Selenium HQ is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Eggplant Performance writes "Offers unique object identification, ideal for UI layer regression automation but limited scalability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Selenium HQ writes "Continuously being developed and large community makes it easy to find solutions". Eggplant Performance is most compared with Appium, OpenText LoadRunner Professional, Apache JMeter, Tricentis Tosca and SmartBear TestComplete, whereas Selenium HQ is most compared with Eggplant Test, Tricentis Tosca, Worksoft Certify, Telerik Test Studio and OpenText Silk Test.
We monitor all Performance 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.