I can provide a review for one of the products that I have experience with. The kind of testing tools we use includes a real phone for testing our application, but we were searching for a cloud solution for testing. However, we ultimately did not choose any of the companies we were trying.

My experiences with BrowserStack and LambdaTest include conducting very important tests on both products. I was really surprised by LambdaTest. It was a very good service and for the price, I think it is a very good solution. However, we did not test all of the products, as we only tried these two products.

We tried LambdaTest for testing to determine if the solution could be a good fit for us. The testing was conducted during one month with 20 people for evaluation of the solution.

Geolocation testing helped verify localized content, as we used this function, but I did not test it very deeply, so I do not have comprehensive information that would be useful.

After a few months, we realized that the phone that we have was sufficient for us.

The main differences between the real phone and LambdaTest, in my opinion, are that because we have old iPhones, we can give the employees who need a real phone for testing a device. We were searching for a solution to help them access a different kind of iPhone. If I were the only one to decide if it is a good solution, I would choose LambdaTest. However, because of the many phones that we have, the final decision was to keep our real phone. I think in two or three years, we may need to reconsider this decision.

The best features with LambdaTest that I liked most include an easy interface, user-friendly design, and not overly technical functionality for people using it. It is user-friendly, easy to understand, and easy to start testing with this solution. Additionally, each time we saw something that did not seem to work very well, we reached out to the company, and they returned the call very quickly and helped us find a way to solve each problem we encountered.

I did use the geolocation testing feature.

I was not impressed with how detailed their analytics and logs are from LambdaTest. The solution we were testing is being used because many of us are working from home. It was easy to implement because with a real phone, we have to bring a real phone to each person. Since three years ago, many employees have been working from home, so we were trying to find a solution for this challenge. We had no need to exploit the information for the analytics generated in the background. The purpose was simply to make it easy for our employees to access a phone.

The downsides I noticed include that the pricing was very good, but the visual quality of the image sometimes suffers. The contrast on a real iPhone provides better contrast than with the cloud solution. The only aspect that was less favorable than on a real phone was the contrast of the color.

We tried LambdaTest for testing to determine if the solution could be a good fit for us. The testing was conducted during one month with 20 people for evaluation of the solution.

My experiences with BrowserStack and LambdaTest include conducting very important tests on both products. I was really surprised by LambdaTest. It was a very good service and for the price, I think it is a very good solution. However, we did not test all of the products, as we only tried these two products.

The best features with LambdaTest that I liked most include an easy interface, user-friendly design, and not overly technical functionality for people using it. It is user-friendly, easy to understand, and easy to start testing with this solution. Additionally, each time we saw something that did not seem to work very well, we reached out to the company, and they returned the call very quickly and helped us find a way to solve each problem we encountered.

In my opinion, it is very easy to set up.

My experiences with BrowserStack and LambdaTest include conducting very important tests on both products. I was really surprised by LambdaTest. It was a very good service and for the price, I think it is a very good solution. However, we did not test all of the products, as we only tried these two products.

After a few months, we realized that the phone that we have was sufficient for us.

I would assess the benefit of LambdaTest's automated Selenium grid testing as not applicable because we wanted to see what the difference is and what it would bring us to use a cloud solution.

I would give LambdaTest an eight on a scale of one to ten. I rate it an eight because it offers many kinds of phones and many versions. It is easy to understand the product. Each time I selected a command, the response was really sufficient for us.

The real phone that we use includes different versions of iPhone and different versions of Android.

I am not familiar with Apple products such as iPhone 16, iOS SDK, or ARKit because we just use the common iPhone to ensure our customers receive support. We use the iPhone that we know our customers mainly use.

My overall rating for LambdaTest is eight out of ten.

In our project, we use LambdaTest for browser testing. The team has one shared account. We primarily use LambdaTest for mobile automation, real-time testing, and real device testing across various processes. We also utilize it for mobile testing, reporting, and API testing.

Automation and mobile testing have improved our efficiency.

LambdaTest is highly beneficial, especially for mobile automation testing. Because your company might not have access to various mobile devices or tools, LambdaTest provides a solution for mobile and cross-browser testing in such situations, making it extremely valuable.

The tool can improve its testing speed. Changing or switching to another mobile phone can be very slow on a real device.

I have been using LambdaTest for six months.

The scalability is slow.

I've used Appium.

The initial setup is easy. There are other team members for maintenance.

If you want to control the versions of your computer or mobile device, you can do so quickly with LambdaTest. You don't need to change your browser, app, or phone versions manually. It's a wonderful and beneficial tool that saves me time and makes it easier.

I recommend the solution. Overall, I rate the solution as seven out of ten.

We are doing manual testing, covering the overall scope. There are multiple dimensions that need to be tested. And regarding the trouble, like, there were some information issues on certain devices, and that's why we needed to check those on the same devices.

The solution is very handy. And the device support is very good. I like that the technical support team handles it all in one, too.

There is room for improvement in support. The community should extend support. Like, Lambda has a huge community, and support should be available online.

Another area of improvement is stability and performance of the solution.

I have experience with the solution.

The solution is stable, but I've noticed some issues with the speed and overall performance. For example, when I'm using my development laptop, and I switch to LambdaTest, the performance decreases. This is especially noticeable when I'm using a dimension that is working on the laptop, and I try to use the browser. In general, the availability of the device could be improved.

Other than that, I've also had some issues with the speed of certain API calls and the rendering of data. For example, when I'm onboarding data, the process can be slow.

My main concern is that the camera is not available when I'm using LambdaTest. However, I've been able to work around this issue by using the camera to check my connections.

Overall, I would rate the stability a seven out of ten.

It is a scalable solution. We are three end users, and we are planning to extend the usage.

There is room for improvement in customer service and support. It's a solution that was implemented years ago, and not a huge community really good. So that's why maybe we can work on technical support.

It was easy to set up. It was not hard. You just need credentials and set up the virtual devices, and that's good to go. I am looking forward to integrate it with Slack and Jira.

It's pretty good to use and to write the code for the manual automation and even for the developers to debug this thing. It's a pretty wholesome solution. That's why we prefer to get the solution. Because not only the testers can look into this, but the development team can also use the tool.

Overall, I would rate the solution a seven out of ten.