Sauce Labs is a cloud-based platform
for automated testing of desktop and mobile applications. It is designed to be instantly scalable, since it is optimized for continuous
integration workflows. (The vendor says that when tests are automated and run in parallel on
multiple virtual machines across many different browser, platform and device
combinations, testing time is reduced and developer time is freed up from
managing infrastructure.) The Sauce Labs testing cloud is intended to be paired…
$19
per month
TestComplete
Score 8.0 out of 10
N/A
TestComplete is a GUI test automation tool that enables users of all skill levels to test the UI of every desktop, web, and mobile application. TestComplete is best suited for testers, automation engineers, and QA teams in any industry.
$2,256
per license
Pricing
Sauce Labs
TestComplete
Editions & Modules
Live Testing
$19.00
per month
Virtual Cloud
$149.00
per month
Node-Locked Base
2,256
per license
Node-Locked Pro
3,950
per license
Float - Base
5,077
per license
Float - Pro
7,901
per license
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Sauce Labs
TestComplete
Free Trial
Yes
Yes
Free/Freemium Version
Yes
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
Optional
No setup fee
Additional Details
Free service available for Open Source projects.
Pay for only the modules needed. TestComplete Pro includes all three modules: desktop, web, and mobile, at a bundled price point, as well as access to the parallel testing engine, TestExecute.
TestComplete has additional add-ons, including TestExecute and the Intelligent Quality Add-On.
The Sauce Labs is more expensive than BrowserStack, especially for smaller organizations. Both Sauce Labs and BrowserStack are excellent mobile testing platforms with extensive device coverage, automation capabilities, and reporting and analytics features. While Sauce Labs …
Firebase is pay per use and so was difficult to work out the true costings, it also felt more developer focussed whereas Sauce Labs had better Appium support for our Automation team. AWS device farm appeared to require either Android or iOS and we wanted both, so that wasn't a …
Sauce Labs offers more features than all 3. BrowserStack is less expensive for very limited features. Katalon does not provide the minimum functionality required for most clients. Experitest support is lacking and very difficult to get a response from.
Sauce Labs is comparable and we were more familiar with it. I think both works well and in some cases, Perfecto was easier to use since our customer used it and had scenarios already created. Various staff members in our org have used Sauce Labs over the years, and in cases …
We used Selenium Webdriver with BDD+ cucumber before SauceLabs. It required some time to configure the cross browser testing, also we had some issues with configurations, errors and etc- it was taking long time. We decided to move on with Saucelabs because - it is in plain …
As we use it internally, we selected it because it was free, but now I can't live without it. I've been a Salesforce admin for four years, and no tool has made a bigger impact on my performance than AQI.
Intuitive UI and fabulous support system make them a great vendor. Sauce Labs has a well structured support system that is extremely important in the current distributed environment.
Sauce Labs stacks up to Perfecto with the sauce labs real device test bank is already in place and the vast amount of devices.
Sauce Labs stacks up to AWS Device Farm in a different manner. When a company is looking to implement automation or a CI/CD pipeline price is always a …
Sauce Labs was chosen over a competitor because they had a fully functional product ready to go. The competitor was selling a roadmap that hadn't yet been fully implemented. There were no guarantees that those features would ever be implemented with the competitor.
Sauce Labs provides more features for lesser cost over AWS device farm. Sauce Labs provides devices and browsers whereas Device farm provides only devices.
Pricing is one of our most concern. Since Cross Browser Testing has increased their price, we were looking for another alternative. We are really happy with Sauce Labs right now. The price is very reasonable and the coverage is always at most. Not to mention that their customer …
My company used BrowserStack in the past. It was before I came on board, so I am not sure of the reason that they switched. Ever since I have been here, we have been on SauceLabs, and I am quite pleased with it. I have maintained a private selenium grid at a previous …
Previously, we were just using internal tracking systems and internal software in order to track bug issues as well as work on bug issues. With Sauce, there was definitely learning curve as everyone was used to working on the internal systems for over 10 years so it was …
We have also tested out Browser Stack, which at the time was more geared towards manual testing. Although it appeared to support more mobile devices/browsers, we also wanted something that can plugin in easily with our existing Selenium test scripts. Sauce Labs was definitely …
Sauce Labs is the first application I've used for this purpose and therefore don't have much of a radar for the rest of the market. It fills our needs just fine though.
I initially went with Sauce Labs due to a reason that no longer exists: access to specific public real devices without having to wait because there's only one of that device. While it's a bummer things changed, with the offering of their dynamic allocation, I'm able to get a …
We still use both products in our company, since Postman is mainly used for backend automation and TestComplete for frontend automation. The difference is that via Postman you can easily write tests that send different requests to your server, get the response, and compare them …
TestComplete stacks up against them in terms of GUI and seamless performance. It records each and every step and action been performed in the application and produces a detailed report in a well-structured manner. It can connect and access seamlessly among various databases …
Below are the points why we selected TestComplete 1. Better UI. 2. Plenty of validation cases supports i.e. checkpoints. 3. Multiple scripting languages. 4. Better accuracy and robustness. 5. Good documentation and Video tutorials. 6. Great support team.
TestStand is a much more complex tool than TestComplete and it's for a little bit different solutions I think. For desktop apps I would use the TestComplete, For Mobile / Web -> Python + Behave + Pytest selenium - TestComplete is much overcomplicated and slow! For …
The major advantage over other tools is the ease of use. A chimp will be able to figure out TestComplete whereas the others require extensive coding knowledge
TestComplete is more complete than Cypress.io because Cypress.io is only used to complete end-to-end testing for web apps. These two tools are user friendly and easy to use. For the needs of our company, we have chosen TestComplete for the variety of testing applications.
TestComplete is a robust test automation tool and not for someone who expects to just record and playback. This can be done with [TestComplete], but the strength of the tool is the ability to code complex actions and capturing of objects. The reporting of results is also …
It has been almost 5 years since we researched products, but TestComplete gave us the best overall advantage to achieve our goals. So, that is why we chose it.
We used before the Coded UI Tests which are in Visual Studio / Azure DevOps, and the tests were impossible to maintain and very very flaky. Then in 2015, we selected TestComplete, as it was clearly the tool with the most feature for desktop UI testing. Selenium was …
We are using Katalon for web-based applications, mainly because our QA engineers have a strong experience with it. But it does not allow precise item identification in Delphi-based applications and that was a show stopper for us. Having received recommendations for …
TestComplete was selected after trying multiple product offerings. Initially these product offerings were installed with trail keys, and various factors were weighted and sized based on complexity to install, and ease of use. TestComplete scored higher than any other product …
We aren't 100% sure that we will stick with TestComplete for our web-based UI testing for the long haul because Selenium is a bit lighter on the overhead front, but we definitely really like it for testing our standalone applications and utilities. As far as a complete testing …
We use TestExecute together with TestComplete. The ease of use is one of the reasons we have stuck with it for years now. Developers are satisfied due to the time saved with this tool. If you are still hesitating—don’t. We try to find the replacement, but so far can’t because …
Access to specific devices is good, as well as access to a specific browser/platform. We are not able to connect our dev environments to Sauce Labs because the devices are put in our VPC. Some versions are not available like iPhone with iOS 12.1. With iOS, there is limited/no support for push notifications without real devices due to Apple's provisioning profiles.
Best suited to smaller unit test or tests broken up, couple of forms at a time Not suited - larger regressions test involving multiple systems. - my main regression involving payments has been unsuccessful for the last 3 years despite all working fine separately and while being watched
TestComplete is great for working with our non-web applications.
TestComplete allows us to interface with our web application in a robust way.
Despite the age of our architecture, TestComplete handles the old stuff that's been around a while as well as the newer technology when we are able to implement it.
Cost: it's a little bit pricey, but I don't pay the bill so I'm not complaining too much there. Overall, I'd say the price isn't ridiculous but it's not inexpensive.
Logs: I don't find their logs very useful for front-end web tests, I usually refer to my own logs if I have a bug/issue/error that needs investigation.
I love how it's super easy to use. Not only that but it ensures security and it always has great updates to ensure that it continues to be awesome. Also, I love how nice the people there are too. Their support tea is amazing. Anytime, I have a question, they are super speedy to answer.
We have bigger test automation pack using test complete at the same time we also think this is not good performing tool for large number of test automation scripts.
I think Sauce Labs is great and I've been using them since late 2014. With that said, I'm very used to how their interface works and how to get what I need. I think if a brand new user would come in and use it, it would still be easy, but maybe not as easy as it is for me. That's why I rate this area a 9 instead of a 10. Still great though!
It is usable when you become accustomed to its quirks. Not using it for two months and then you need to re-learn the quirks for some features (but some quirks are so awful that they will never fade from your memory). So, when using it regularly, it is possible to be quite productive, if no big correction in name mapping is needed.
Yes, Sauce labs is always there, and it is easy to troubleshoot when you are having any connectivity issue, they always keep you informed when they plan to perform any type of maintenance window on their side in advance, so you can plan and will not affect your current work. I do not recall any outage.
The time where they acquired TestObject and were trying to integrate their services would probably be the most annoying time. Annoying as features were in two separate places (websites) for example. But since the introduction of their unified platform, we haven't run into any issues as of yet and we've used them for at least 5-6 years now.
The support is good for Sauce Labs. It is hard to get an initial response but the support has cleared our issues with Sauce Labs. Sometimes we have to follow up and it's hard to get a hold of the team initially. Once we get a hold of the team, the issues are always resolved.
I am not sure if it's my company that makes getting Sauce Labs integrated into the team difficult or is it Sauce Labs. The process for getting Sauce Labs for a project is quite a tedious process and the information for using Sauce Labs initially is quite lacking. There is little support for getting started
If you develop a mobile application and your testing process goes in cloud, probably you will face a problem - how to implement a stable connection between your mobile devices and testing servers
Firebase is pay per use and so was difficult to work out the true costings, it also felt more developer focussed whereas Sauce Labs had better Appium support for our Automation team. AWS Device Farm appeared to require either Android or iOS and we wanted both, so that wasn't a great fit. It was also not possible to run Cucumber tests on Android in AWS but this may no longer be the case, but it was another unknown for us and not worth the risk. Sauce Labs explicitly mentioned Cucumber support.
TestComplete stacks up against them in terms of GUI and seamless performance. It records each and every step and action been performed in the application and produces a detailed report in a well-structured manner. It can connect and access seamlessly among various databases directly to speed up the testing process.
With private devices, you have full reign over usage of them, so no complaints there. Public devices are available if no one else is using it, which is understandable. Browser VMs are based on number of open sessions and Saucelabs give you a certain number depending on what you need. If you need more, then you pay for more. It is as simple as that. You need more devices, then you can pay for more private ones too. A workaround for public devices is to pick the first available one and not be too picky, that's if you are able to of course.
Provided an ability for us to run 55,000+ tests/month across all browsers.
Gave us an opportunity to showcase the great things we have done in quality using Sauce Labs. This was through a white paper and an opportunity to speak at Sauce Con. People in our company have a far better appreciation for the what we do and how far we have progressed in the quality space.
Improved product quality overall, since automating tedious tests frees up time and is not prone to fatigue
When getting started - depending on the complexity of the software/UI tested - it can be a time sink before it brings actual value, and changes to the structure of the UI need to be communicated early, so the changes can be implemented on time to run the automation
Once set up, the maintenance cost is low, and the automation frees up a lot of resources especially in an agile environment where there are a lot of releases that would need regression tests.