Usability is critical for the success of any website or web application. To make sure your web-based project is bug-free, you need to run UI tests, many of which can—and should—be automated. Doing so lets you detect issues like bugs, slow loading times, or poor responsiveness so you can fix them before they make a bad impression on users. But while you can find a lot of UI testing tools online, this abundance of options makes it challenging to choose the right UI tool for your project.

I love this quote, though I’m not quite sure if “Jan Houtema” is a real person. It may be a Paul Graham pseudonym… But in any case, yes, change breaks brittle things and one of the challenges of automated browser testing is to mitigate that effect as much as possible while you design tests for an ever-changing application.

When we initially started building our test recorder, we needed a way to validate the id attributes being used on the page. We would sometimes capture an id attribute in a recording, only to find that it failed when we used it in a test, because it didn’t meet specification. For instance, sometimes websites would use an id with a number in front, like this: That is technically invalid, at least in the HTML4 specification.

This post originally appeared on the Build Blog by ThinkApps. View the original post by Runscope’s VP of Developer Relations, Neil Mansilla. So you’ve designed, built and launched your app. Before you pat yourself on the back and move on to the next project, your work isn’t quite done. In order for your app to gain adoption, consistently delight users and be successful for the long haul, you need to put certain systems and workflows in place.

Many people don’t test their WordPress websites, and it’s a problem. While the core of WordPress is fairly well-tested by its creators, users, and the open-source community, the same cannot be said for every plugin and theme. There’s an infinite combination of versions, hosting environments, plugins, themes, and configurations. You can’t trust the community to catch every bug that could affect your website.

Regression testing is an important practice in software development. It tests to ensure your application remains stable and reliable even as changes and updates are introduced. Each new change introduces a risk of breaking existing functionalities, potentially causing shipping delays or launch postponements. Evaluating your application against a full suite of tests helps find and fix unexpected software bugs or errors.

Quality Assurance (QA) teams must run extensive tests to ensure that a website or application performs as intended before release. However, rather than manually running these tests, which can hinder productivity, modern teams are using QA automation. By automating QA testing workflows, teams can rapidly execute these tests using standardized processes, frameworks, and software. Developers can quickly fix any errors and deliver high-quality code so that product teams can speed up release times.

Modern development strategies require implementing a continuous integration and delivery/deployment (CI/CD) pipeline to consistently deliver high-quality software and updates. To achieve this, development teams must create a CI/CD pipeline that effectively automates and accelerates the software development lifecycle. This enables developers to build and deploy better code faster. But, to create a well-functioning CI/CD pipeline, they need to use the right CI/CD tools.

It’s hard to know who to trust for automated testing tools. With so many options, deciding which one will fit your specific needs can be tough. That’s why we’re breaking down the top tools in the industry, their advantages and disadvantages, the tests they’re used for, their price points, and more. We’ll also share user reviews and give you our recommendations to help you find the perfect fit for your business needs.

You’re searching for “Selenium alternatives” because, while Selenium is a popular open-source test automation tool, it has certain limitations. Its slow execution speed can be problematic when dealing with large test suites or complex applications. The basic reporting and analytics features make finding problems and testing results difficult. It also lacks a mobile app testing focus — an essential feature for most organizations.