BrowserStack

What do you like best about the product?

I use BrowserStack to test our application on different browsers and real devices to find bugs that are specific to certain devices or browser versions. I especially enjoy the broad variety of devices and browsers that are available to select. In cases where bugs occur or when I want to test our product on common devices or browsers that I don't have access to, BrowserStack comes in handy. The initial setup was quite straightforward, making it easy to get started.

What do you dislike about the product?

nothing comes into my mind

What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?

I use BrowserStack to test our application on different browsers and real devices to reproduce device or browser-specific bugs. It comes in handy when we don't have the specific devices for testing, allowing us to ensure compatibility across a broad range of platforms.

What do you like best about the product?

App Live gives instant access to real Android and iOS devices, which removes the usual delays caused by device unavailability or lab scheduling. The touch interactions feel natural enough to validate gestures, scrolling behavior, and UI responsiveness, things emulators often fail to reflect accurately. I rely heavily on App Live when reproducing customer-reported issues, because matching the exact device and OS version is straightforward. Device logs, screenshots, and session recordings help capture evidence immediately, making bug reports much clearer for developers. Features like device rotation, network simulation, and app reinstalling within the same session save a lot of setup time during exploratory testing.

What do you dislike about the product?

Popular devices can take time to become available during peak usage hours. For animation-heavy apps, there can be slight latency in visual rendering. Older devices sometimes feel slow, which can impact the speed of exploratory testing.

What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?

Eliminates the need to maintain and upgrade a physical mobile device lab. Enables quick reproduction of production issues on exact device-OS combinations. Improves test coverage by making it easy to validate behavior across multiple devices in one session. Speeds up bug reporting by attaching real device evidence instead of screenshots from emulators. Helps QA teams run effective exploratory testing without infrastructure overhead.

What do you like best about the product?

BrowserStack Accessibility makes accessibility testing feel like part of normal QA, not a separate audit that happens once a year. Running accessibility checks directly on real browsers helps catch issues that behave differently across Chrome, Safari, and Firefox. I like how issues are grouped by severity, which helps prioritize what genuinely blocks users versus what can be improved later. The Website Scanner is useful for coverage, it surfaces patterns across pages, not just isolated issues. Reports explain why something is an accessibility issue, which helps developers understand the impact instead of treating it as noise.

What do you dislike about the product?

Automated scans still miss interaction-heavy issues like complex keyboard navigation or screen-reader flow. The same issue repeated across multiple pages can inflate reports if not reviewed carefully.

What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?

Removes the dependency on late-stage accessibility audits by shifting checks earlier in development. Helps QA teams catch accessibility regressions during routine testing cycles. Gives teams visibility into accessibility debt instead of discovering it post-release. Creates a shared reference point for QA, developers, and designers when discussing accessibility issues. Reduces risk of compliance failures by making accessibility testing repeatable and measurable. Saves time during releases by avoiding last-minute accessibility firefighting.

What do you like best about the product?

Browserstack was instrumental in helping us debug issues that our platform encountered on mobile devices. Since we relied on webviews for mobile, diagnosing API failures would have been much more difficult without Browserstack.
Another feature I really liked is it solves the need of having physical devices for testers, making testing possible across various device types and models.

What do you dislike about the product?

When testing wallet payments such as Google Pay and Apple Pay, I found that they were not supported through BrowserStack. This is because setting up a Google or Apple account is required before testing these wallets. I believe that if there were a way to mock social accounts, it might have made this feature possible.

What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?

This tool has been very helpful for mobile device testing, especially since it allows us to review logs and inspect API failures. Being able to access this information makes troubleshooting much easier.

What do you like best about the product?

I think it's user friendly and good for non-technical user

What do you dislike about the product?

I think it's quite expensive sdgwgwgvevwev

What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?

You can start creating automated tests in minutes. no scripting or Selenium/WebDriver knowledge needed