Cross-platform testing has accelerated releases and now needs smarter AI-driven test creation
What is our primary use case?
My main use case for BrowserStack is to test things on real devices, hosted real devices and also to run automated tests on these devices to support multi-platforms, multiple different browsers, different platforms, and different devices. That is the use case we have to run tests.
A quick specific example of using BrowserStack for this kind of testing is when a big automobile company had a configurator for their vehicles, and we were using BrowserStack to test that the configuration of these vehicles can be done by customers on smaller mobile devices, iPads, or different laptops and platforms which the user uses. We also have the dashboards of the tests that were run on these devices.
What is most valuable?
The best features that BrowserStack offers include the ability to run manual and automated tests on real devices. We can create bugs, integrate it with other platforms like Jira or Azure, and use self-healing scripts with Selenium. We also have the test runs for different versions or with different frameworks, not just Selenium but with Playwright as well. Additionally, there are real-time dashboards and notifications sent when tests fail or when we need screenshots or recordings of test executions, and we can easily integrate this into our pipelines.
BrowserStack has positively impacted my organization by providing an out-of-the-box solution for whole test executions across different projects for our automobile customers. We have worked on around twenty to thirty projects, and the need for a stable, customizable single test execution platform that supports different platforms has been met. It has helped manage the entire quality assurance of the product efficiently.
The measurable improvements due to BrowserStack include a significant efficiency gain, allowing the whole team to collaborate on testing and communicate faster. Also, the easier integration with project management tools has been beneficial. The documentation of findings has improved, which helps us share insights with different project stakeholders.
What needs improvement?
Going forward, one way BrowserStack could improve is by incorporating AI concepts to create tests automatically from provided URLs or user intentions, generating scripts without needing users to write automation scripts. This could include natural language prompting for both test creation and insights from results.
While pricing for BrowserStack is acceptable, usability could improve with easier onboarding and understanding of features. An AI-driven chat interface could simplify managing the entire product using natural language instead of manual settings adjustments in various sections.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using BrowserStack for approximately eight to nine years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
BrowserStack's scalability is enhanced by its auto-scaling capabilities on AWS, allowing us to increase the number of parallel testing instances as needed.
How are customer service and support?
BrowserStack customer support is excellent, with knowledgeable staff assisting throughout onboarding, setup, and understanding our needs to provide tailored solutions. I would rate the customer support an eight on a scale of one to ten.
How would you rate customer service and support?
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
Previously, we used LambdaTest but switched to BrowserStack for greater stability and performance, bolstered by excellent documentation and support.
How was the initial setup?
The process of getting started and managing licenses was straightforward. BrowserStack provided the number of parallel users we wanted, such as five or ten, along with the number of parallel executions possible. Their documentation also made it easy to set up.
What about the implementation team?
I have unique aspects about how I use BrowserStack because sometimes we had to use our own AWS deployment of it because we cannot use the deployed BrowserStack by itself. We used a closed API with AWS for that managed instance, having the CI/CD pipeline to run the tests on AWS pipelines. We hosted BrowserStack on AWS and auto-scaled as needed or managed images and observability, and everything is managed on AWS.
What was our ROI?
I have seen a return on investment with significant time savings. For instance, pipeline executions that used to take eight hours have been reduced to one hour, enhancing continuous deployment and providing quicker feedback cycles. This has proven vital for various projects needing parallel executions, making our deployment much faster and more reliable. Some measurable KPIs included the number of tests executed in parallel in one hour, the reduction of bugs, and managing hotfixes, which has decreased due to efficient testing and execution.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
My experience with pricing was that it was a bit on the higher side, around three hundred dollars per user per month, and I hoped it could be reduced.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
Before choosing BrowserStack, I evaluated alternatives including Selenium Grid, Selenium Box, Copado, and LambdaTest, and ultimately found BrowserStack to be superior to all these options.
What other advice do I have?
We also use AWS Code Pipelines to integrate BrowserStack, triggering Selenium tests with it and executing test cases in parallel. This was one of the most important features to execute tests faster, along with automatically saving screenshots, logs, and videos on an S3 bucket for later use or analysis.
For others considering using BrowserStack, I advise that if your project involves complexities requiring continuous deployments or if you have a large test team, BrowserStack is a good choice, especially if you face flakiness in tests. It is great for well-documented and communicated results.
I give BrowserStack a rating of seven on a scale of one to ten. I rate it a seven because I have used it extensively for the last seven to eight years and see it as a good product. However, there are competitors in the market offering similar features, and BrowserStack needs to highlight more unique selling points. Although it has a good market share and stability, I believe there are improvements and features that could elevate it to a nine or ten.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
Private Cloud
If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?
Amazon Web Services (AWS)
Effortless Testing with Smooth Workflows and Real-Device Coverage
What do you like best about the product?
The build upload -> run -> debug cycle is extremely smooth. I don’t have to think twice; it just works.
Parallel execution actually saves my day during regression sprints. Instead of waiting hours, I wrap things up much faster.
Real-device coverage is impressive. Half of the issues we catch now come from devices we’d never be able to afford or maintain in-house.
The session recordings and live logs feel like someone recorded the entire investigation trail for me, super helpful when collaborating with devs.
What do you dislike about the product?
Sometimes older devices take too long to boot, and that slows down fast feedback.
When the dashboard gets busy, the UI feels a bit sluggish. Not a blocker, but noticeable.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
We don’t maintain a physical device lab anymore, no storage, no upgrades, no complaining devices. It helps us catch platform-specific issues early (especially those odd Android OEM quirks). Since everything runs in parallel, our regression cycle has gone from a full day to a few hours. Developers get cleaner, reproducible bug reports because each session has logs + video + device details neatly packaged.
Automated browser testing has reduced manual effort and saves significant testing time
What is our primary use case?
My main use case for BrowserStack is automating some of the test cases. A quick specific example of a test case I automate with BrowserStack is some of the application URLs.
What is most valuable?
BrowserStack has helped us with automating our test cases by reducing the time by almost 60%. The best features BrowserStack offers include giving us an automated way to simulate different browsers or devices, and I mostly use the browser simulation features. BrowserStack has positively impacted my organization by helping us reduce the human capacity by 50%, with that reduction mostly being in manual testing efforts.
What needs improvement?
I feel there is not much to improve about BrowserStack.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using BrowserStack for a year now.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
I have had no issues with BrowserStack's scalability so far.
How are customer service and support?
The customer support for BrowserStack is great.
How would you rate customer service and support?
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
Before choosing BrowserStack, I did not evaluate other options.
What was our ROI?
I have seen a return on investment with BrowserStack, specifically a 50% reduction in human capacity.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing was good.
What other advice do I have?
My advice for others looking into using BrowserStack is to consider purchasing via AWS Marketplace if the purchase price is high. I would rate this review a 10.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
Public Cloud
If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?
Lightning-Fast Parallel Testing with Seamless CI Integration
What do you like best about the product?
Parallelism that keeps pipelines lean. Our Appium tests fan out to ~40 real Android and iOS devices simultaneously, Pixel, Samsung, iPhone, iPad - cutting validation time from 60 min to 15 min.
Artifacts that tell the full story. Each session link bundles video, network/HAR, console, logcat/syslog, and device metadata, so debugging feels like being on the phone itself.
Stable CI integrations. With GitHub Actions and Jenkins triggers, every PR posts a pass/fail matrix to Slack and links back to the exact failing session, instant triage.
What do you dislike about the product?
1. App resigning quirks (push/universal-link entitlements) sometimes add setup friction.
2. Tunnel drops on long tests under corporate proxies.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
Replaces local device labs. No USB juggling, real-world gestures, sensors, and OS versions covered automatically. Faster, cleaner signal. Parallel runs + rich logs mean fewer flaky results and 60 to 70 % faster triage. Confidence before release. We validate upgrade paths, deep links, locale/RTL behavior, and network throttling pre-merge, cutting escaped mobile bugs by roughly 35%
Quick Results but Pricing Could Be Better
What do you like best about the product?
I use BrowserStack primarily for testing, and I've found it to be incredibly valuable in automating our testing scenarios. The platform excels in delivering quick results, which is essential for keeping up with our fast-paced workflow. This efficiency improvement has been a standout feature, as it streamlines our testing process and saves valuable time. Additionally, integrating it with React has been smooth, complementing our existing development stack well.
What do you dislike about the product?
I think the pricing is an issue. Additionally, while we've experienced improvements in efficiency, this aspect also poses some challenges.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
I use BrowserStack to automate testing scenarios quickly, improving our team's efficiency significantly.
Essential for Pre-Launch Testing and Bug Prevention
What do you like best about the product?
Chrome 3PC/ITP readiness sweeps. We run a cookie matrix (first-party only, partitioned, SameSite=Lax) across Chrome/Safari in Live/Automate to catch auth and cross-subdomain bugs before launch, no local hacks. DST/locale “calendar chaos” runs. One pass sets devices to DST-switch dates and non-Gregorian locales to flush out date math, invoice due-date, and countdown bugs that unit tests miss. Install/uninstall sanity for mobile. App Live lets us validate clean-install vs upgrade paths (cold cache, SW/asset refresh), uncovering stale WebView assets and versioned deep-links.
What do you dislike about the product?
No first-class device reservations for release hour; popular Safari/macOS queues still bite.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
Prevents “day-one” auth failures: Cookie/ITP sweeps catch SSO fall-throughs early, avoiding hotfix Fridays. Stops calendar/localization bugs: DST/locale matrices reveal off-by-one and formatting issues before customers do. De-risks mobile upgrades: Clean-install vs upgrade checks surface cached asset and link-routing regressions, cutting MTTR on app releases.
Effortless Real-Device Testing with Powerful Debugging Tools
What do you like best about the product?
I drag an APK/IPA, jump into a real Pixel/iPhone in ~60 seconds, and capture video + screenshots + logcat/syslog from one session URL, perfect for Jira. True “real-world” toggles. I can flip device language (including RTL), time zone, geolocation, and 3G/4G/offline profiles to surface auth, deep-link, and caching bugs that emulators miss. WebView + native in one view. Seeing JS console next to native logs pinpoints whether a failure is app code or web content, cutting triage time.
What do you dislike about the product?
Entitlement hiccups on some IPAs (universal links, push) make first-time setup fiddly.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
Reproducible, ticket-ready bugs and one link holds video, device/OS, and logs, no “can’t reproduce” loops. Coverage without a device cart with real iOS/Android versions expose layout/gesture/localization issues early. Faster PR unblocks - Quick sanity passes on feature branches behind VPN catch issues in minutes, not days.
Essential Accessibility Testing with Real Device Validation
What do you like best about the product?
True screen-reader validation on real devices. In App Live I enable TalkBack (Android) and VoiceOver (iOS) to verify focus order, rotor actions, hints/labels, and custom controls, no simulation guesses. Shift-left checks in CI. On App Automate we run Espresso Accessibility Checks and XCTest a11y assertions to fail builds on missing labels, tiny hit targets, dynamic type clipping, and contrast snapshots before manual passes.
What do you dislike about the product?
OS settings at scale are manual. System toggles like Dynamic Type, Reduce Motion, and High-Contrast can’t always be scripted reliably across big device grids.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
Catches real-world a11y bugs early, Focus traps, unlabeled icons, motion sensitivity, and text scaling regressions surface pre-merge, not in production.
Repro you can trust, Video + logs + device details end “can’t reproduce” loops and satisfy compliance reviews.
Simplifying Multi-Device Testing for Teams
What do you like best about the product?
BrowserStack offers a very convenient way to test on real devices without the need for any setup. I appreciate the smoothness of the interface and the speed with which I can switch between various browsers and operating system versions. It saves me a great deal of effort and helps keep my testing workflow straightforward and efficient.
What do you dislike about the product?
Sometimes, the loading time is a little longer than I would expect, but this doesn’t take away from the overall excellent experience.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
BrowserStack spares me the effort of setting up and maintaining a personal device lab, as it enables immediate testing on real browsers and various operating system versions. Thanks to this platform, I can detect layout and performance issues early, minimize the time I spend on setup, and achieve a much more reliable and efficient testing workflow.
Excellent Test Tools and Process
What do you like best about the product?
Test Tools & Process – Accessibility & Coverage
What do you dislike about the product?
The performance is an issue, and it's not possible to run this in closed or secured environments
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
The platform provides efficient QA coverage, which has helped streamline our testing process. Additionally, we've experienced noticeable cost savings on devices, making it a practical solution for our needs.
