We performed a comparison between HeadSpin and Selenium HQ based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Functional Testing Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It has an interesting feature called AV box testing. A lot of companies that are in the OTT segment don't really understand what their streaming is like. They can't test for streaming quality. There are restrictions where you cannot simulate live streaming. For example, on Netflix, you can't simulate how a movie is being streamed on a remote device. That's why HeadSpin has got this AV box testing feature. It is a patented feature. They send an AV box to your location, and you can test live streaming, which is something that no other company does."
"The most valuable feature is that this is the first connected intelligence all-in-one platform."
"The technical support is really helpful because we can set up direct calls with them if we want to. We can use Zoom or Google Meet to interact with them directly, and if there is an issue in our system, they will help us by reproducing the issue in their machines and trying to figure out a solution. The support is really smooth, and we like that they're very supportive."
"The initial setup of HeadSpin was very easy and user-friendly. It was easy to configure and write a script."
"The most valuable feature of HeadSpin it's the integration with other solutions. It is great. I can search for an element or do a quick debugging on the application right on HeadSpin. It's very useful."
"The most valuable features of the product are the performance parameters it gives us."
"Some of the most valuable features of this solution are open-source, they have good support, good community support, and it supports multiple languages whether you use C-Sharp or not. These are some of the most important benefits."
"The most valuable feature is the Selenium grid, which allows us to run tests in parallel."
"Its biggest advantage is that it is very customizable."
"It supports most of the actions that a user would do on a website."
"It is a scalable solution."
"It is programming language agnostic, you can write tests in most currently used languages."
"The most valuable feature of Selenium HQ is the ability to create automatic tests that can replicate human behavior."
"Has a good Workday application that enables us to handle some of the custom controls."
"HeadSpin needs to improve the hardware. With the mobile, the battery life reduces and must be continuously charged."
"Support and pricing could be improved."
"If you want to do some testing or check the devices manually or check the application in a particular device manually, it is really laggy. That's a disappointment because sometimes we would like to do manual testing when our local devices are not available."
"Sometimes, devices go offline and some features are not functioning on some devices, specifically on iOS."
"They should automate their onboarding. A lot of things are still manual. They can create a video assistant or something like that to completely automate the entire process."
"HeadSpin could improve on the user interface because it is very poor. The checks that are done on the iOS devices are very difficult, but for Android, it runs great. For all iOS devices, the user interface and how it interacts with the device are very poor."
"It would be very helpful to be able to write scripts in a GUI, rather than depend so heavily on the command line."
"Selenium could offer better ways to record and create scripts. IDE is available, however, it can be improved."
"We can only use Selenium HQ for desktop applications which would be helpful. We are only able to do online based applications."
"Selenium HQ can be complex. The interface requires a QA engineer or an expert to use it."
"For now, I guess Selenium could add some other features like object communications for easy expansion."
"I would like to see XPath made more reliable so that it can be used in all browsers."
"The initial setup of Selenium HQ is difficult in many areas, such as the framework."
"Selenium HQ doesn't support Windows-based applications, so we need to integrate with the third-party vendor. It would be great if Selenium could include Windows-based automation. You need to integrate it with a third-party tool if you want to upload any files. When we interact with a Windows application, we usually use Tosca."
HeadSpin is ranked 20th in Functional Testing Tools with 6 reviews while Selenium HQ is ranked 5th in Functional Testing Tools with 103 reviews. HeadSpin is rated 8.0, while Selenium HQ is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of HeadSpin writes "It fulfills everything from automation to manual performance". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Selenium HQ writes "Easy to use with great pricing and lots of documentation". HeadSpin is most compared with Perfecto, BrowserStack, Sauce Labs and pCloudy, whereas Selenium HQ is most compared with Eggplant Test, Tricentis Tosca, Worksoft Certify, Telerik Test Studio and Automation Anywhere (AA). See our HeadSpin vs. Selenium HQ report.
See our list of best Functional Testing Tools vendors.
We monitor all Functional Testing Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.