It is a web-based visual regression testing tool with advanced features. It has extended test feature using which you can clone and reuse a test by giving new input parameters. It supports import-export options and allows you to export your projects as .zip files and a backup is also created and stored in the cloud storage space. In addition, it allows you to record visual baseline by capturing screenshots of every test steps. It delivers seamless integration with JIRA and CI. Along with this, it has collaboration support that allows multiple users to access a same test project. It supports parallel test execution and also has test scheduler feature to predefine tests at regular intervals.
| Support | Business Hours Online | Customer Type | Individuals Large Enterprises Medium Business Small Business |
| API | Contact | United States | |
| Deployment | SaaS/Web/Cloud Installed - Windows | Category | Automated Testing Software |
Disclaimer: The pricing details were last updated on 10/04/2018 from the vendor website and may be different from actual. Please confirm with the vendor website before purchasing.
This is a cloud based platform for UI testing automation. Being an Automation Engineer, this tool is really beneficial for Web based visual regression test scenarios. It allows you identify UI elements without manual verifications. It is a very fast tool and easy to maintain. Test reusability is a part of UI regression testing and thanks to this. As this is cloud based, it enables testers to collaborate on tests via a web interface. This is also a very user friendly tool due to its simple structure.
There are two things which are actually disadvantages of this tool is that it's not browser compatible. It works on Chrome and Mozilla. IE implementation is to implemented soon. Also, test parameterization is the feature which needs to be implemented.
Automatic content verification. Very useful for a novice user. Easy to implement tests and scripts and is accessible on both servers and clouds.
Pros: Automatic content verification is the main reason to choose Screenster for UI automation. It's easy to use.
Cons: I think they are still working on improvements like Internet Explorer compatibility.
Screenster, yes it's a good option for testing. It easily found the. Changes and report as an screenshot after every step. Easy to implement test and scripts. It is accessible on both servers and clouds.
They provide free trial that the good part so we can test it before any purchase.nothing to dislike but need to improve. IE browser compatibility was missing. I think they will work on that.
Used for regression testing.
Pros: This is easy for all QA's to use. User friendly, straight forward. Great for regression.
Cons: It can be a bit slow if you have a large Project or test suite but I am sure that Screenster will help us resolve this as their Customer support is great.
Overall: As a company we are very impressed with the Customer support and speedy replies from Screenster. They are willing to look at our requirements for using this tool and accommodate our business needs. Screenster also agreed to build reporting functionality which will be a very powerful tool for me to use as a QA manager in order to report back on test run results to the rest of the business.
Pros: Screenster saves you the pain of coding your tests or learning how to automate a new tool. It's easy to use and is great for regression testing. It integrates with JIRA and has a CI plugin, plus it can be run on a server or in the cloud.
The best part is all you have to do is run it and then review the detected changes which saves a lot of time and keeps our UI's on point.
There's a free trial you can get your hands on too.
Cons: Not much to say here except if you have dynamic content then this sort of automated tool may not be the best fit.
Overall: Screenster helped us go beyond manual testing for UI changes without a big learning curve.
Pros: Initially i was a bit hesitant to switch from conventional manual or used to automation tesitng that we have. But if you wana improve your ui and ux , then screenster would help you overcome it. It might be hard initially but its worth a try
Cons: Its hardly noticeable on the web and tough to convince your management to switch when you have other big and open source automation tools
Pros: It does not have anything that is worth checking out
Cons: They are lying, they do not have Google as their customer. Their solution looks and feels outdated. The only thing they can do right is to spam.
Overall: I do not recommend it.
The main reason our team loves Screenster is that it has automatic visual and content verification. We've been using Selenium but it's just been a pain. Takes too long to write the tests and they don't catch any of the visual regressions like wrong colors, shifted borders and broken CSS. Screenster is super easy to use and everything "just works" out of the box.
It used to be slow and UX still needs polishing, but it's getting there.
Try it out and see how you like it.
We don't want to use humans for testing. No other tool or framework guaranteed us that when tests are passing we can ship to prod. Screenster does it so we rely on it for smoke tests and most of UI tests.
Pros: Screenster is a great record and playback automated test tool which is great for recording regression test cases. It is simple enough to learn and allows the test to be run across various web browsers. One of the features of Screenster I like is the Visual Baselines and Automatic Content Verification feature.
Cons: Nice and easy to use tool for automating regression test, however, a limitation that us true for all record and playback tools, is the challenge when dealing with dynamic/changing content.
Overall: Automation of regression tests
Automatic verification looks really nice. Similar tools make you choose an element and verify it manually (e.g. by clicking on it) This tool basically creates objects and lets you work with a readymade solution. This is really nice because it’s a huge timesaver.
It’s bit slowish in case with some pages, but the overall speed is okay in most cases. It works for React apps, so, I think, it should work for a basic website or something built with Angular or Vue.
Automated UI testing with verification of DOM and screenshot comparison. The cool thing is that it doesn’t require knowing Selenium or other frameworks (or knowing how to to program in the first place). It WYSIWYG, and it can be used by manual testers (or, in theory, non-testers).
Screenster, LambdaTest, BlazeMeter are some of the effective software which comes with collaboration support.
