BrowserStack
BrowserStackExternal reviews
2,594 reviews
from
and
External reviews are not included in the AWS star rating for the product.
AI-Powered Testing Platform That Saves Time
What do you like best about the product?
What stands out to me is how useful the entire testing platform is, especially with its advanced use of AI to reduce the amount of time testers need to spend. This combination makes the platform particularly effective.
What do you dislike about the product?
The speed of device cloud applications can be a concern. When running manual tests on multiple devices, the process of clearing the device, installing the application, and launching the app—or even just opening a website—can sometimes take twice as long as performing the same tests on a local device.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
Browserstack supports us across various testing functions throughout our testing processes. Currently, our primary use is for Test Management, where we manage 18 projects and several thousand test cases. In addition, we rely on Browserstack for cross-browser testing on a range of device types, including phones, tablets, and desktops. We also use it to test native apps on real devices. Recently, we have started exploring the Low Code Automation tool, as well as the accessibility tools, to ensure our public-facing applications meet accessibility standards.
Effortless Cross-Browser Testing, Saves Time and Money
What do you like best about the product?
I like the simplicity of opening any iOS or Android device with any browser using BrowserStack. This feature saves me time and money. The initial setup for me at the user level was very easy.
What do you dislike about the product?
We're having trouble testing on our staging environment. Our staging URL doesn't work. Our internal engineering team has been working on that for couple of months.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
I use BrowserStack for manual testing on all browsers and platforms, accessing any device saves time and money, and it solves the issue of having any platform or device available for testing webpages.
Reliable Testing with Room for Improvement
What do you like best about the product?
I use BrowserStack for handling my mobile end-to-end tests, and I appreciate the ability to do native device testing on real devices rather than just emulation. It's valuable for me to validate my application before deploying to my staging environment. Once I had set up BrowserStack, it just worked, which is really important to me. I like that the API hasn't changed, and there haven’t been any unexpected changes in pricing, which often happens with other vendors, forcing us to re-evaluate our contracts. The API stability and pricing consistency save us a lot of time, as we generally expect our end-to-end pipeline to just work. Whenever our end-to-end tests are broken, we know it's because BrowserStack caught an issue, so we consider our tests to be reliable. The setup process was fairly easy, which I rate as 8 out of 10.
What do you dislike about the product?
BrowserStack only holds our APK and IPA files for 30 days, so we have to re-upload. I have created a GitHub action to re-upload files before they expire. They also don't publicly document the ability to download screenshots taken from the devices, but I was able to do so. I wish the documentation were more comprehensive. The app upload workflow was also not documented well.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
I use BrowserStack for native device testing on real devices instead of emulation, ensuring my application is validated before deployment. Its stable API and consistent pricing save us time, and reliable tests help catch issues, making our e2e pipeline run smoothly.
Effortless Accessibility Testing with Actionable Reports
What do you like best about the product?
App accessibility scans are easy to run on real Android and iOS devices, not just emulators. It helps catch common accessibility issues early - missing labels, low contrast, improper focus order, and touch target problems. I like that accessibility checks can be combined with regular functional testing instead of being a separate activity. The reports are clear and actionable, which makes discussions with developers easier. Running accessibility checks as part of regular app QA builds awareness instead of treating accessibility as a last-minute task.
What do you dislike about the product?
1. Automated checks don’t cover all real-world accessibility scenarios, manual validation is still needed.
2. Some custom UI components get flagged in a generic way, requiring interpretation.
2. Some custom UI components get flagged in a generic way, requiring interpretation.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
Helps identify accessibility issues early in the mobile development cycle instead of right before release. Reduces manual effort by automating baseline accessibility checks across devices. Makes accessibility part of standard QA, not a one-time audit. Improves collaboration with developers by providing clear issue reports. Prevents accessibility regressions by catching issues repeatedly across builds.
Effortless Cross-Platform Testing with Excellent Support
What do you like best about the product?
I am able to test my app on both iOS and Android devices, including different software versions. The platform allows me to test on phones, tablets, desktops, and more. I find it very easy to use, and we rely on it for all our mobile app testing needs. Implementation and integration were straightforward, and the customer support has been excellent.
What do you dislike about the product?
It lacks support for testing with much older devices.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
I am able to test the app on devices that I cant physically access. It saves a lot of time.
Essential for Cross-Device QA Testing
What do you like best about the product?
I really like the way BrowserStack works. The feature that allows me to record my test if something goes wrong, like finding a bug, is very useful since I can record directly from the page. It's a very good tool because I can also open the dev tools to see if something fails around the API. I appreciate that I don't need an outside tool to start recording my sessions; I can do it directly from the page, download, and attach it to my task. The ability to open dev tools on mobile is especially great since it can be difficult on real devices.
What do you dislike about the product?
Well, in some cases, it's a little bit confusing. Because when I enter, it was like, okay. Well, I need a live or I need the other ones. And that's the only thing. But beside that, because we have a lot of options, and for the beginners, it will be a little bit overwhelming because they could know where they need to go when they need to test an app or a web page on mobile. It may be, harm more, clarification about which tool or which services we need to select.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
I use BrowserStack to test UI across multiple device sizes, solving the issue of not having enough physical devices, ensuring the UI fits well on each type. It allows me to test on various mobiles, including those I don't own like iPhones.
Fast, Efficient Multi-Device Testing with Minor Video Quality Hurdles
What do you like best about the product?
I appreciate BrowserStack's speed and performance, especially since there are no lags or degraded performance noticed on this platform, unlike some other platforms like LambdaTest. The ability to test the same app over multiple devices, whether iOS or Android, and have parallel sessions to see real-time results is very useful. I also find the new features like Image Injection helpful for testing camera scenarios. The provision for testing local apps by setting up a tunnel and storing APKs on Google Drive for easy access is a nice feature. Additionally, integrating BrowserStack with Jira has been seamless, with execution results and evidence getting updated directly in Jira.
What do you dislike about the product?
Well, there were some limitations with regards to video recording quality. Since these videos were getting attached in JIRA tickets, we saw the quality was not optimum.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
BrowserStack allows me to test apps over multiple devices and browsers, including local apps using a tunnel. It enables parallel sessions and offers real-time results. The speed and performance are excellent, with features like Image Injection enhancing testing scenarios.
Essential Tool for Comprehensive Multi-Device Testing
What do you like best about the product?
I find BrowserStack great for testing various functionalities and key features of our site across different devices and geographic locations. I appreciate its support for Local Environment Testing. BrowserStack has been a pioneer in helping businesses support end-to-end testing.
What do you dislike about the product?
Initial session startup time can be improved a little bit.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
I use BrowserStack for testing our site's functionalities across various devices and locations. It solves multi-device testing needs and allows flexibility for different screen sizes.
Great Cross-Browser Testing, But Needs Smoother Performance and Clearer Debugging
What do you like best about the product?
I really like how easy it is to test on many different browsers and real devices without having to set anything up locally. It saves a lot of time and gives confidence that things work in real user environments. The integrations and debugging tools also make it practical to use in everyday development and testing.
What do you dislike about the product?
BrowserStack is generally a very useful tool, but there are a few areas where I think it could be improved. Sometimes test execution feels slow or unstable, especially during peak hours, which can affect productivity. Debugging issues is not always straightforward, and clearer error messages and logs would really help when sessions fail. The UI can also feel a bit cluttered, and navigating between sessions, logs, and settings is not always intuitive. Automated tests can be flaky at times, so better stability and diagnostics would be a big improvement. Lastly, pricing and limits on parallel execution can be restrictive for growing teams.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
BrowserStack solves the problem of testing across many browsers and real devices without needing to maintain physical hardware or complex local setups. This benefits me by saving time, reducing setup overhead, and giving confidence that features work reliably for users in real environments.
Centralized Testing Artifacts, Smooth Setup
What do you like best about the product?
I like the centralized place for test artifacts because it enables team collaboration and makes test analysis fast and straightforward. I find the initial setup of BrowserStack very easy with clear documentation.
What do you dislike about the product?
I don't like the occasional flakiness and slower session startup times with BrowserStack.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
I use BrowserStack for running e2e Selenium tests daily. It solves test results analysis and provides a centralized place for test artifacts, enabling team collaboration and making test analysis fast and straightforward.
showing 21 - 30