Manual regression testing is time-consuming, costly, and difficult to scale as your team grows. As you add more features to your product, you have to hire more people and spend more time completing your regression test suite in every software release cycle. Automating your regression test suite can help your team scale up testing without adding more headcount.
In software testing, the term test coverage refers to how much of an application’s functionality is covered by test cases. In practice, the term also often refers to the effectiveness of that testing. QA teams use test coverage as a benchmark because it tends to correlate closely with the quality of the end product. Better test coverage typically means fewer bugs get shipped to production.
Despite Selenium's popularity across the QA industry, it has drawbacks and won’t be the best fit for everyone. Specifically, Selenium IDE: In this post, we'll compare seven alternatives to Selenium, focusing primarily on our platform, Rainforest QA, and explore how the alternatives approach solving these drawbacks.
Almost all software and web-based companies (SaaS, e-commerce, and more) that care about a bug-free user experience will eventually need a systematic and repeatable process to test their products. And for most software teams, the only way to feasibly accomplish testing fast enough that it doesn’t become a bottleneck in the software development lifecycle is to incorporate automation tools.
Many software companies have no formal quality assurance strategy, and those that do take one of two inherently flawed approaches: Either they (a) ask developers to do QA or (b) delegate QA to a siloed team, whether it’s internal or outsourced. Having been in the QA space for a decade, we’ve learned that both approaches are deeply flawed.
