Selenium HQ Reviews

We don't directly use Selenium. We have built a wrapper around Selenium so other teams can consume it.

We are using version 4.0.1. We run it on a Microsoft public cloud in the CI/CD server.

There are around four teams which are currently using this solution, and we have a target of having around 10 teams.

It's easy for new people to get trained on this solution. If we are hiring new people, the resource pool in the market in test automation is largely around Selenium. It has a wider community. If there are issues, you can look around online and find a good solution.

Selenium is in continuous development. They release very stable versions. Those are the key points which helped us pick Selenium over other tools.

There are a few things we have to actually design and plan when we are building the automation. There are new tools which handle it by themselves, but that is a give and take when you actually use or choose a tool. 

Shadow DOM could be improved and the handling of single page applications. Right now, it's a bit complicated and there are a lot of additional scripts required if you want to handle a single page application in a neat way.

With these technologies, at times you have a lot of callbacks. Those aren't handled very well with Selenium. At some point of time, suppose you have entered something and the button needs to be enabled. Now, in normal terms, it seems to be a client side action, so if you enter something on the client side, JavaScript is running. It'll say, "Value is this, so I'll enable the button."

With this technology, if you enter something, it will go back to the server, get some value, and then it will enable the button. At some point of time, your project's delayed, and there is a callback happening in the background. It will not try to understand that, and it may just timeout.

I have been using this solution for about eight years.

I think it has stabilized a lot, but it's not the best tool in the market. It has a lot of room for improvement, but it has a very big community.

It is certainly scalable. It depends on how you want to use it. You can use it over a grid with multiple office machines, or you can run it standalone.

We have never used technical support because there is normally good content on the internet.

We evaluated other options but chose Selenium because of the skill sets in the market. If you use other solutions, the challenge is that if a person leaves, you won't get a second person or third person. Replacements are very difficult to come by if you are using different solutions.

It's actually complex. It's not really straightforward, but it depends on what you're actually building for your organization. We have built a wrapper around it for other teams that are actually consuming it.

Initially, you build a solution around it, which is a challenge. If you are trying to build a standalone automation with Selenium, it will be a challenge.

There isn't a set deployment. If a team wants to use it, they can start using it from day one.

It's open-source, so it's free.

I would rate this solution 8 out of 10. 

Learning is easy. Implementation is not as easy, but it is still better than other tools in the market right now. I'm giving it an eight because there are a lot of things Selenium is not supporting. The rest of technology is changing, but they are not changing along with it. Normally, if we are writing a complex test, we have to do a lot of workarounds, which isn't good when we are writing scripts.

I think it's very easy to screw up with Selenium if you're using it for the first time. If you are getting it for a large organization or large project, it makes sense to have some professional help.

We basically use Selenium for smoke testing and regression testing. We don't use it much for functional testing because you can easily and manually use a bunch of tests and make them a Zephyr. We use Zephyr as our test case management tool, which is a kind of a plugin for JIRA. So, we create our test cases in Zephyr, and then they are tagged to be automated. After that, we put them into our regression suite. Each team has its own independent regression suite. Currently, my team has a couple hundred, but I know some teams have 500 or 600 in their suite. We also have a suite of smoke tests that we run through Selenium.

All the code is on-prem. We're currently just running the tests through the Jenkins pipeline, but we want to be able to run them in parallel in the cloud and a lot quicker. We are not quite there yet. 

When we execute our smoke test, we're able to perform them really quickly with Selenium. Currently, in our project, we have 12 smoke tests. If I have to run them sequentially, it is going to take half an hour. If I run them in parallel, each one of them takes less than two and a half minutes. So, I could do smoke tests in under three minutes and get feedback right away about whether everything is up and running. We do production deployments throughout the week, but we try to do our main deployments on Sunday. Sunday is not the best working day, but because it is a weekend, we can get our work done. We want to be able to perform these tests quickly. The same is applicable to our pre-prod environment. We can run our smoke test right away, and it will be able to tell us that all the dependencies for our applications are up and running. As compared to doing it manually, which can take a few hours, it is really quick. 

It saves time for regression testing. It takes about three people to do the regression testing manually for probably two or three hours, whereas you can do it a lot quicker if you can get them in parallel. So, you can get quick feedback about whether your application is up and running right away. You don't want to go down the road where you find a problem after four or five hours. You want to find it out as quickly as possible.

Its biggest advantage is that it is very customizable.

It saves time and enables us to execute our smoke test and regression tests really quickly.

We have a lot of inheritance going here. I've been doing it for so long, so it is pretty straightforward for me, but you have to know Java to be able to work in our framework. I know some people use Python, but you have to know Java. That's kind of the hardest thing when you're doing interviews. People just don't know Java. This is where probably Worksoft has an advantage because it is codeless. So basically, you are just pointing, clicking, and providing things like Excel spreadsheets for your test data. In that sense, if you are using Worksoft, it is a lot easier to train or onboard somebody.

We use X path for our selectors, and sometimes, it is difficult to create locators for elements. It is very time-consuming because they're embedded deeply. A lot of that comes from the way that you architect your page. If devs are putting the IDs on their elements, it is great, and it allows you to get those elements super fast, but that's not necessarily the case. So, Selenium should be able to get your elements a lot quicker. Currently, it is time-consuming to get your selectors, locate your locators, and get to the elements. You have to find the element on the page, and then you have to go to the page and the console. In the console, you can put the next path in there to locate the element manually in the JavaScript to say that this one will work, and let's use this because we'll put a string of that element. After that, we get the element based on that stream. That's probably the most time-consuming part of that. It is dependent on how well you've designed the front-end UI. We use something called Data Tests attribute through which we can locate elements super fast. If people consistently use those, that's great, but a lot of times when they go in there to fix some bugs, they're not consistent in doing that. They usually just find a way to locate the element and change that in the code. If you change something, then your code or your test is going to fail because the locator has changed the element, and you can't get it anymore. You have to manage a way to get it. So, when you're running your suite of tests and you see some failures, it takes some research to find out why did this paneling go, and then you find out that it happened because of the frontend change. Someone removed this element and changed it, and you have to change your locator, which is very time-consuming. It is kind of like a false belt. It is failing, but it is not. It is only failing because of your locator. It is not failing because the app is not functioning correctly. It is a kind of false failure. Sorting the elements quicker would be a big thing with Selenium.

I have been using this solution for eight years.

We have a dozen teams at our company, and each one of them is independent. We give them a pretty extensive Selenium framework, and then they basically start building based on that architecture and create their test cases and page objects.

In terms of its usage, Selenium is our testing framework. We use Jenkins to perform our test cases. A lot of them are done through a pipeline, and a lot of them are queued on to run automatically. There are triggers in there to run something every day at 9:00 AM. We don't have to manually say that we want to test this aspect of our page. 

The excellence team now has four people, and that's just the team that manages the framework. There are 25 people who can do test automation. They do manual tests and automation. They use the same framework, and if they find some issues, they'll ask us. If they're constantly having to do a certain function and having to write the Selenium code for it, they will ask us to do that. We might create a tool inside the framework to make their life quicker. We can put it inside the common Selenium framework so that it is always available to everybody.

Selenium is an open-source solution. If you have a problem, you can pretty much Google something and figure out a solution for it. There are so many people who are using it, and there is a lot of material that is available out there for you to troubleshoot any kind of problems.

You don't usually directly go to the open-source code. I don't visit it at all nowadays. In the beginning, I did do it a lot, but not so much now. We're now in a state where we are just executing test cases and creating new ones. It does everything we need and meets our needs.

It has been Selenium for me from the get-go. I've been here at XPO for almost five years. Before that, I was more of a contractor, and I did a couple of contracts. When I went to a healthcare company, they really didn't have a great framework. So, I started one, but I doubt that they're still using it. That's because it requires a lot of knowledge to be able to create a framework.

It is something that I've been always using. I've done some research on some other tools to be able to do things, but I always come back to Selenium. 

We're an angular-based house, and all our pages are in angular. There are some other products that run on top of JavaScript besides Selenium. There are quite a few people out there who are using Protractor, which is an end-to-end type of test framework, but it works specifically for angular applications. We have never gone down that path. We just stuck with Selenium.

When I first came here, the framework was in place, but it was more basic. There is a team of three guys here, and we're all pretty smart. We're the excellence team for the framework. We've done a lot to make it a lot simpler for us to create our test cases. Three people probably worked 25% of the time for a few years on it. So, a lot of time was invested into the framework, and it has come a long way. It is much more sophisticated now.

Maintaining the architecture and Selenium framework for testing requires work. It is an ongoing kind of process. We're constantly maintaining it and updating it.

It is all free.

Each product has its own pros and cons. It is very customizable, but then you have to have a lot of knowledge about Java or an object-oriented programming language that works with it. They keep creating frameworks to make your life easier, and it is a very customizable framework, but you have to have the knowledge to be able to do it. There are other tools out there, such as Worksoft, for which you don't have to know Java.

If you're starting from scratch, it would be good to get a good Java developer and make him or her get everybody up and going. That Java developer can train junior test automation people. You should hold on to that person for as long as you can. Getting a good Java person is probably critical when you're creating your Selenium framework.

It is not the easiest thing because it is hard to get a quality assurance resource that is knowledgeable about Java. So, it is very difficult to get a good framework in place. Usually what happens is that you'll get QA people who start doing QA, and then they start doing test automation. Once their skills get up there in Java where they're decent, they move over to being a software developer. So, they get out of the QA world, and they go over to be a developer. So, you lose that talent. You had to do your framework, and now they're gone. Maintaining good talent is difficult. It is hard enough to maintain the Selenium framework, and when you start losing people, it makes it harder. The next person comes in line, and it is just a revolving door. 

I would rate Selenium HQ an eight out of 10 because it is not perfect, but it is the best tool out there to do automated testing.

I use Selenium HQ to create automated scripts for automated applications.

Since Selenium HQ has multiple plug-ins, we can use it with multiple tools and multiple languages.

I rate Selenium HQ a nine out of ten for stability.

I rate Selenium HQ a nine out of ten for scalability.

The level of ease to set up Selenium HQ is medium. You need to have experience in order to do the initial setup.

Selenium HQ is a free, open-source solution.

Selenium HQ is deployed on-cloud in our organization.

Overall, I rate Selenium HQ a nine out of ten.

We use Selenium HQ for the automation of functional test cases.

The tool is easy to use and log in with respect to other tools. It is open-source. We can customize the product. I also like its security.  

When we upgrade the version, some features are missing. I want the product to include some AI capabilities. 

I have been using the product for 11 years. 

Selenium HQ is very stable. 

The solution is scalable, and we have around 9,000 users for the product. 

The tool's support is good, and they resolve issues nicely. 

Positive

I have been using the open-source version. 

You need to be aware of Selenium HQ's architecture. I rate it a ten out of ten. 

We use the solution to perform tests and robotic process automation.

The solution helps us improve and maintain a specific set of work quality. Also, it saves a lot of time for us.

The solution's core functionality is excellent.

They should add more functionality to the solution. Also, they should provide technical support services.

We have been using the solution for five years.

I rate the solution's stability a ten.

It is a scalable solution. I rate its scalability a ten. It is easy to deploy on any device.

I used Micro Focus UFT One earlier.

The solution's initial setup takes time. I rate the process as one. We require a specialist to download and install it manually. Later, we need to create a framework and set it for an automation process. The entire process is quite complicated for new users.

The solution is an open-source tool.

I recommend the solution to others. Its learning curve is very high for Java and comparatively less for Python. Apart from this, it is highly stable. A lot of documentation is available for it in case of any queries. I rate the solution a nine.

We are using Selenium for web test automation.

We are saving time with regression testing by using test automation.  

Selenium is also open source, so now we are integrating all our automation tests into the full pipeline. 

Selenium is very famous. Due to its popularity, you can find pretty much any answer in open discussions from the community. This is the power of Selenium. Whatever you need, whatever your question, you will find an answer.

The initial setup is easy.

You can integrate the solution with pretty much anything.

It's open-source and free to use.

Maybe they could improve the record and play plugin for element detection. That would be ideal. If they could build some tools above Selenium for that, I'd find it helpful. People sometimes do not have that much technical knowledge, and having something more plug-and-play would be appealing.

We have many plans in our pipeline that still need to be implemented. Maybe we will find that we need some features that need to be integrated with Selenium, for example, for a multi-browser or for implementing many machines. We haven't fully implemented this solution yet.

The drawback is the solution is not easy to learn. You need resources and technical knowledge and have to deal with the maintenance of script changes. 

While it works well with Chrome, if you use it with other browsers, you may have issues. 

I've been using the solution for three or four years. 

We've never had any stability issues. It's reliable. The performance is good. It doesn't crash or freeze.

It is scalable. It's easy to expand. 

We have about 15 people working on the solution. 

I've never spoken to technical support per se. We tend to get help via the community if we have questions. It is quite robust and there is a lot of information about all kinds of issues publicly available. 

I have used other tools as well. Each tool has its own pros and cons. Each organization also has its own unique needs. There are budgets, resources, and other factors that would come into play as well.

The solution isn't difficult to set up. It's quite straightforward. 

I'd rate the ease of setup eight out of ten. 

I cannot recall exactly how long the deployment itself took. 

Sometimes there may be some maintenance required around upgrades. You would need to check the compatibility between the software, for example. That said, the maintenance requirements are pretty low. It's not complex to maintain the product. 

We handled the implementation ourselves, in-house. 

This is an open-source solution, which is a very positive benefit. 

I'd rate the solution six out of ten. It's not an out-of-the-box solution like Oracle or SAP. 

We primarily use the solution for normal regression tests.

I like most of it. It is possible to get a lot of help and find help on the internet since Selenium is so widespread and established. The documentation is great.  There is  a lot of help on websites like Stack Overflow.

It is very stable.

The product is open-source. 

We are thinking about codeless automation, like what ACCELQ offers. They could maybe release a similar product that would be a codeless product.

The initial setup was difficult. 

It would be nice to have it on the cloud, like ACCELQ. That way, we don't need to set up it ourselves and don't need hardware for that. That would also allow for many people at many subsidiaries or locations to work simultaneously with it.

I'd like the possibility of automatically checking the installed browser version and automatically downloading the Selenium driver that suits the installed browser. Otherwise, you have to download and set up it manually, and if you get a new browser version, you have to do it every time, and it's time-consuming.

We've been using the solution for one year. 

The solution is stable and reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

Of course, you need a lot of time to optimize your scripts so that they run stable.

This is not really scalable. 

If you consider load tests or multi-thread testing, you need very powerful hardware to start several browsers. That's why in this aspect, not very scalable if you run tests in parallel.

We just have two people leveraging the solution right now. They use it regularly, on a daily basis. 

There is a lot of documentation and general product knowledge online. We don't have direct support contact as it is an open-source solution. 

We did previously use Eggplant. It's not open-source. It's actually pretty expensive. 

One benefit of Eggplant was testing mobile apps. Also, you don't find so much information on Stack Overflow or on the internet about Eggplant; they have good support.

It was not very easy to set up. 

We needed to add a lot of plugins like TestNG and Maven. The whole configuration was not very easy. I am not sure if it is the Selenium setup or just the whole system setup.

The solution is open-source and free to use. 

I'm an end-user. 

The solution is okay, however, you need to use it together with the TestNG and with Maven and use different plugins that improve it.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

SeleniumHQ is WebDriver-related. It is a package that we can use with any language such as Java or Python.

We use Selenium for automation purposes. For example, if we need data from a website, we write code that will extract the data automatically. If there are logins or pop-ups, the code will close them, so we can extract the data. 

When we are testing a website, we use SeleniumHQ automation testing to determine if there are any bugs.  

The most valuable feature of Selenium is how easy it is to automate. For example, often when data is needed, someone will sit and copy and paste it. What we can do with SeleniumHQ is automate it so that the data is directly extracted from the tools and libraries that we use. This saves time and is much better than copying and pasting.

There are some tiny issues with SeleniumHQ. For example, with respect to the scraping tests. Sometimes, a website will have some hidden items or blockages that inhibit us from extracting data directly. It would be beneficial if Selenium could extract that information.

The other issue is browser-related. There are small bugs causing it to break automatically. Sometimes it will close automatically. 

I have been using SeleniumHQ for a year and a half.

Stability depends on how you write the code. If you handle all conditions, there will be some surprises. Suddenly, you will have pop-ups and other conditions. 

SeleniumHQ is scalable. Anyone can use it. We have approximately 30 users of the solution. 

Customer service and support with Selenium are good. If any bugs are found and brought to their attention, they will immediately help. They provide lots of documentation as well as answers on the internet. The technical support team, themselves, will answer questions within 24 hours.

We use Python, so the initial setup of SeleniumHQ was quick and simple. You can use any browser or tools like, Chrome, Firefox, or Edge to run the automation testing. 

We are using Selenium open-source, so there is no need to purchase anything.

We evaluated other options. 

For mobile scraping, non-mobile scraping, or to test anything mobile there are more applications available on the internet, like Appium for Android, which is like Selenium for browsers, or TestComplete for iOS drivers. 

However, Selenium is particularly the best for browsers or PC, operating systems.

I would recommend this solution to anyone considering implementing it into their organization. Overall, I would rate SeleniumHQ an eight out of ten.

We mainly use HQ for UI automation and some of the main functions of test cases. We are customers of Selenium. 

The best thing about the product is that it is open-source and free, which is why we opted for it. It's also customizable which is great for us. There is a lot of online assistance available in forums and support on the Stack overflow. HQ is continually updated and supported by Selenium. You can write your own scripts without needing to depend on what's already there. The UI is automation friendly. When there's a slow network and an older application, the waves get very flaky and Selenium can handle that. Setting up and working with Chrome and Firefox is easy on Selenium.

The solution is intended for browser automation so it's not a support testing tool and there are no features. I'd like to see some flavors of test case management available that don't require any additions and there could be some improvement in the fluid-based area as well. Selenium is meant for developers but QA people cannot write test cases very easily on it. If you don't have a development background, it's tough. 

I've been using this solution for eight years. 

We had a few stability issues initially but it's very stable now.

The product is scalable. We have around 40 to 50 QA users in the company. 

We reported a few bugs on Selenium and they were resolved. The support was mediocre. Because it's open source there's not much support available.

The initial setup is easy but it requires certain development skills to set up. Without that, it's not easy. The difficulty is in creating a framework and that requires thinking about the maintainability and scalability aspects.

We went with Selenium for several reasons; it's open source and free, they provide a lot of support, and we can use Java technology which Selenium has available. Other tools generally don't provide perpetual licenses.

It's important to get hands-on experience with the program. I would also suggest getting your frame pyramid in order. You need to decide on the language you're going to use and have that programming language support in your organization and decide which other tools you're going to use. Also, think of your application and whether Selenium is the appropriate solution.  

This is the most widely used tool throughout the world in this space. It has so much support available and is a benchmark for other tools so I rate the solution eight out of 10.

the primary use cases of this solution are UI regression testing and API automation testing.

The most valuable features of this solution are its flexibility, being open source, and it has close to no limits when it comes to integrating with any language, or browser you are using.

The solution can be improved by providing better reporting logs.

I have been using the solution for four years.

This solution is the most stable product I have used when it comes to web automation.

This solution has no scalability limits.

The initial setup is easy, like a walk in the park for any user.

I implemented the solution in-house.

The solution is open source.

Before choosing the solution I evaluated Cypress and Postman. 

I give this solution nine out of ten.

When it comes to UI testing this solution is perfect but for API automation it lags behind compared to Postman.

Around 70 percent of our engineers use this solution on a daily basis.

Since the solution is open source you can create a user account on GitHub and receive free community-based technical support when it is required.