The main use case for me using BrowserStack, which I have been doing for four years, is mostly around testing solutions supported for older devices and operating systems, such as iPhone 8 or iOS 12, especially for applications used by customers who do not have the most recent devices in the market and are still using Internet Explorer or earlier versions of Edge. This helps provide us devices and browsers for those legacy solutions.

When using BrowserStack for those legacy devices and browsers, the process typically involves using it for both manual and automation testing, allowing us to utilize APM as well as Selenium in both ways.

The best features BrowserStack offers for us include App Live, which has really helped us; the quick availability of real-time devices as soon as new ones are launched, such as when iPhone 17 was released; integration with project management tools including Jira and Slack, which is very handy; and access to network logs, something we have made good use of.

From a productivity standpoint, the integration with the wider ecosystem of project management tools has the biggest impact for us, specifically with Jira and Slack, as it helps us log tickets and bugs directly, providing evidence for the tickets we are logging. This was much slower before, especially when dealing with flaky applications or newly live releases that have numerous problems. The integration helps us quickly log bugs using the evidence provided by BrowserStack.

BrowserStack has positively impacted our organization by improving collaboration and showing quality improvements in releases, with the number of defects leaking into production significantly reduced.

We track two metrics: the number of bugs leaking to production per application and the number of customer support issues reported. We have seen a reduction of close to 20 to 25% in defects compared to past releases. When we started using BrowserStack, release four had about 150 bugs reported compared to 200 in release three. Incidents reported by end customers have also seen a reduction.

I think false positives are an area where BrowserStack can improve, as I have often seen things working fine on actual devices, but on BrowserStack devices, issues arise due to network slowness or AWS region connectivity problems that cause lag.

In addition to false positives and network slowness, feature improvements could include monitoring dashboards or consolidated dashboards for multiple releases across different domains, allowing us to see runs scheduled and link us to reports of passed and failed cases.

I have been using BrowserStack for a total period of close to four years across two organizations.

BrowserStack is mostly stable for our needs, though sometimes there is slowness in the network, especially when working with AWS-based hosting.

Currently, BrowserStack's scalability for our organization meets our needs as we have relatively limited use cases, and so far what we have scaled has worked fine for us.

I have not had to interact with BrowserStack's customer support team, as most issues were addressed locally.

Before using BrowserStack, we had used LambdaTest and physical devices as our prior solutions.

We have definitely seen a return on investment with BrowserStack, particularly in tracking the value realized per automated test case and time savings in testing apps across multiple clouds, browsers, and operating systems, leading to money savings since we previously had many resources engaged in that.

The setup cost and licensing were handled at the enterprise level, as our bank is a large organization, and these central negotiations were managed by the finance team, so I have limited exposure to that.

Before choosing BrowserStack, we mostly evaluated LambdaTest as an option.

We have a local version of BrowserStack for direct access, and we also access BrowserStack from AWS EC2 machines, providing us with both kinds of interactions available.

My advice for others looking into using BrowserStack is to evaluate options, perform an ROI calculation beforehand, and identify the specific use cases BrowserStack excels at, as this will lead to a much higher ROI return for your organization rather than using it for everything, including manual testing. I would rate my overall experience with BrowserStack an 8 out of 10.

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.

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.

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.

I have been using BrowserStack for approximately eight to nine years.

BrowserStack is stable.

BrowserStack's scalability is enhanced by its auto-scaling capabilities on AWS, allowing us to increase the number of parallel testing instances as needed.

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.

Positive

Previously, we used LambdaTest but switched to BrowserStack for greater stability and performance, bolstered by excellent documentation and support.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

I feel there is not much to improve about BrowserStack.

I have been using BrowserStack for a year now.

BrowserStack is stable.

I have had no issues with BrowserStack's scalability so far.

The customer support for BrowserStack is great.

Before choosing BrowserStack, I did not evaluate other options.

I have seen a return on investment with BrowserStack, specifically a 50% reduction in human capacity.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing was good.

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.