Image credit: Freepik
Speaking of manual vs automation testing, which one do you prioritize on the GUI level? Most teams that I’ve seen want automation but start with manual testing in the early stages of product development. Later on, they add the automation of UI/UX happy paths with Selenium, Protractor, or other frameworks, gradually reducing the number of manual tests.
When it comes to UI testing automation tools, there’s no shortage of options to choose from. Test automation frameworks, desktop applications, cloud-based platforms — the range of available solutions is broad, to say the least. But which one is right for your application?
What regression testing tools will you actually want to use in your future projects? I bet Selenium will remain a go-to solution for many, even though the framework will celebrate its 14th birthday this year. But does this make it the right choice for test automation in 2018? In my opinion, it’s not necessarily the case.
Source: Parasoft
Ever wondered how much software testing costs tech companies? According to Cambridge University, the global annual spend on testing exceeds $300 billion. Software testing takes up 25–40% of a typical IT budget, gravitating towards 40% in 2018.
User acceptance testing is your last line of defence before each release, which sounds like a good reason to take UAT seriously. But is this reason good enough to warrant investing time and effort into UAT automation?
If you were to characterise lean testing with a single phrase, what would it be? I’d use a motto you’ve probably heard: think big, act small, fail fast, and learn rapidly. As an integral process of lean software development, lean testing is an approach that values effectiveness above all. It prioritizes flexibility and adaptability over schedules, documentation, and clearly-defined roles.
If you’ve been following this blog, I’m sure you’ve stumbled across one or two articles that mention happy path testing of the UI. If that’s right, you probably know that we, the folks at Screenster, aren’t too excited about happy paths in UI testing automation.
There’s a paradox surrounding automated regression testing of the UI in Agile. On the one hand, everyone tells you how important it is. On the other, it doesn’t seem to work right in far too many Agile teams.
Test parameters are an age-old issue with well-known solutions. Use variables for the values that you know will change. For each variable, remember that the parameter name you’ve chosen must be meaningful. Follow these two rules, and you’re in a good shape. Seems simple so far, right?
The two founding pillars of software testing, verification and validation are the two terms that each and every tester knows. As far as the former term is concerned, we have great news — and an awesome feature that the Screenster users will love. Specifically, we’ve added a new verification mode for more flexibility in UI regression testing.
