Selenium HQ Reviews

My company started using Selenium HQ two years ago for unit testing. We were trying to evaluate the record and playback features. We are basically outsourcing this function, and we're charged for every developed feature and testing. So, we thought that we could test it ourselves using the record and playback feature. We were navigating our web application records in a macro and tried to reproduce that later. But for some reason, it's not the best solution for us.

I like the record and playback features. We also appreciate that it's not just writing on a script that we create. While we were browsing our web application, it automatically records all the clicks and movements of points. We also appreciate the fact that it provides screenshots of everything in the output.

It would be better if we could use it without having the technical skills to run the scripting test.

I think we have been using Selenium HQ for two years, but I only joined the company six months ago.

We are satisfied with its stability.

We are satisfied with its scalability. We have five or six users working with Selenium HQ.

Selenium is an open-source solution, and It's free.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Selenium HQ a seven.

Our primary use case is we have a new development going on for our tool, our project, where we have to test web-based applications. These are all web-based applications wherein Selenium fits well for all the web applications.

I have found using IDE and Cucumber framework is good.

I would like to see some reporting or test management tools.

I have been working with Selenium HQ for the past eight months.

The stability is evident and it is a good tool.

The scalability is good. On a scale of one to ten, I would rate it a nine.

When it comes to technical support you do have to go online for the support community.

Selenium only works with web-based applications, it does not work on desktops, or any Java-based, form-based applications. There is no automation for any of these kinds of applications. With the Oracle Application Testing Suite, it can do anything. Currently, it has some drawbacks in automating desktop-based applications. However, the main difference is Selenium only sticks to web-based applications. But Oracle Application Testing Suite, or any other testing suite, like UFT, can automate a form-based or desktop-based application.

The initial setup is very simple and not complex.

The pricing is open source.

If you are wanting to do some web-based automation, definitely Selenium HQ is a good solution. I would rate Selenium HQ a six out of ten.

The primary use case for us is IntelliJ and IDEA.

The most valuable feature I have found is the bomb file and it is easy in its coding. It has a lot of capabilities and is compatible with many languages.

I would like to see a library of bomb files with an automated process and integration with Jenkins and Slack.

I have been using Selenium HQ for three years.

Selenium HQ is a stable solution.

Selenium HQ is definitely scalable.

Technical support consists of excellent documentation online.

Positive

The initial setup of Selenium HQ is straightforward.

Currently, Selenium HQ is free for customers.

I would rate Selenium HQ an eight out of ten.

I mainly use Selenium HQ for web application automation.

Selenium HQ's most valuable feature is its online community support, which is comprehensive and easy to access. 

Selenium HQ doesn't have any self-healing capabilities. It would also be improved with the ability to input multiple identifiers and quickly search the content. In the future, Selenium HQ should include machine learning features.

I've been using Selenium HQ for seven to eight years.

I haven't found many issues related to stability - so far, Selenium HQ has worked wonders for me.

In terms of scalability, I'm not particularly happy with the grid stuff, but it is scalable.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward, so long as you have the correct plugin. I would rate the setup experience 4.5 out of 5.

Selenium HQ costs around $1000 per month, which is a bit high based on what they're offering.

I would recommend anyone thinking of implementing Selenium HQ to go for it - it fits into every format, depending on your time and skillset. I would rate Selenium HQ nine out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for automating a solution on the web and automating testing.

We are a testing company. We can automate testing using Selenium.

The solution is very easy to use. Once you learn how to do things, it becomes very intuitive and simple. It's quite a user-friendly product.

The interface is great.

We've had good experiences dealing with support.

The pricing is fine.

Handling configurations is very good.

The stability has been good.

It's an easy product to set up and deploy.

If a company wants to scale it, it can. 

The product offers a free community edition. 

Selenium has problems with some objects. The objects are not in the squares of the screen. The layout can be a bit strange. It makes it hard to find objects.

We'd like to see some more image management in future releases. 

We've been using the solution for two years at this point. 

The stability is great. We haven't dealt with bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. the performance is good.

If you need to expand the solution, you can. We've never had an issue with scalability.

We have about seven people using the solution at this time. 

Technical support is great. They are helpful and responsive. We haven't had a problem with them.

The initial setup is not complex or hard to do. It's pretty simple and straightforward. A company shouldn't have any problem implementing it. 

We have found the pricing to be reasonable. It's not too high of a cost.

We are actually using the community edition, which is free. 

We are a customer and an end-user. We don't have a business relationship with Selenium.

We have the solution deployed both on-premises and on the cloud. 

I'd rate the product at a nine out of ten. We've been very happy with the product. 

We primarily use the solution as a functional testing tool.

Selenium is a freeware tool, through which I am using Java for automating our project testing and with its feature grid and a different browser, I can do the functional testing. We can automate our functional testing through a browser. It supports all types of browsers including Firefox and Chrome.

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.

It's easy to customize according to our needs. 

Now we are getting lots of extensions such as BlazeMeter, where you can record and generate the script and modify, et cetera.

The initial setup is easy.

The parallel testing in Selenium is lacking.

The latest versions are often unstable. 

There's no UI in Selenium. Beginners who want to start using it must have knowledge of Java, Python, or any programming language. If you are using a Chrome extension, that is a BlazeMeter extension, you can record and make the script, however, that is not very helpful for beginners.

The editor is based on Eclipse. It would be nice if there was some in-built UI for this.

I am leading a 20 person team where I have some junior staff and we have to set up lots of demos and training for them to be comfortable with Selenium.

Occasionally, if someone is downloading the latest version of Java, it might not align with the Selenium version. There needs to be a way for Selenium to alert you if there will be a conflict between versions. 

I've been using the solution for four years. 

The level of stability depends on the version you are referencing. For example, Version 3.1.46 is very stable, however, Version 4.0.0, the latest version, is not.

There is no technical support available for Selenium, as it is an open-source product. There is a blog where you can find answers to questions, however, there's no one to actually reach out to. 

Previously, I was using VSTS Ultimate.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward and simple.

You first have to install Java, JDK, in your system. Then you can install an editor such as Eclipse. In Eclipse, you can incorporate all the Selenium jar files.

The solution is free to use.

The reason we are using version 3.14.1 and not the latest version is that this version is the latest most stable option. The most recent versions are often not the most stable. 

I'd rate the solution at a six out of ten.

There are lots of tools in the market that are paid versions, such as QTP. Those have got lots of features. While Selenium has some good features, due to the fact that it's free, you cannot get support, which is why I have reduced my rating by a few points. 

We use it when you have a large number of scenarios to be tested manually, you would go for a web-based automation solution.

It is a good automation tool.

I would like to see Selenium HQ support legacy platforms.

I have been using Selenium HQ for the past five years.

I find Selenium HQ to be a stable product.

Selenium HQ is scalable for our needs.

Selenium HQ is not complex to work with.

We deployed in-house and it took between two to three weeks to complete.

The licensing pricing depends on the customer's needs.

It is a straightforward application to learn. If you know Java, it is something that can be easily learned and used. It has a lot of support out there. But again, it might not support some of the older back-end platforms. I would rate Selenium HQ an eight out of ten.

I mainly use Selenium for web applications.

The most valuable features are ExpectedConditions, actions, assertions, verifications, flexible rates, and third-party integrations. I also like that it's an in-house solution, which means you're not dependent on any tool.

I find Selenium to be slow - its server takes a long time to interact with your browser and sometimes fails. It's also somewhat outdated, for example, it has no capacity to handle things like desktop pop-ups, does not support mobile testing, and has very limited reporting. In future releases, I would like Selenium to focus on headless execution when executing their test cases, using PhantomJS or Chrome Headless.

I have six years of experience with this solution.

There are issues with scalability in that it requires a technical person to perform it and takes a lot of time.

Selenium is open-source and has no technical support, but there is a big online community on platforms such as Stack Overflow who provide help for users.

I've previously used Node.js and Cypress.

Selenium is comparatively difficult to set up and requires technical knowledge in order to integrate and configure it. I developed a complete, fully-functional framework for this solution, which took around eight months to automate around 100 test cases.

In Selenium, you have to write extensive code - even if you want to automate one login scenario, you have to write a code of around 50 lines - which uses a disproportionate amount of man-hours. It takes such a long time to use this solution that it may be worth looking into other free solutions such as TestProject or Katalon Studio, or paid solutions to replace it.

Before implementing Selenium, I think it's very important to find out the maximum resusability of the code using the parameterized XPaths.

I would rate this solution as seven out of ten.