Boozang vs mabl: Which is a better fit?

Its visual test automation simplifies testing, boosting our speed and website quality. It's browser-friendly and integrates seamlessly with tools like Jenkins and Jira.

Conrad C

Qa engineer

No, because if any features that are missing, Mats and his team at boozang are quick to implement them into very quickly.

UI and API testing made very easy for non-IT people. Availability and professionalism of the Boozang support team: big thank you to Mats and Wensheng, keep up the good job.

Its hard to think of a feature that is not likely in the product.

Super duper easy to use the tool for quality and exploratory testing.

Since I don't know how to code much, I was a little scared to use Boozang at first. The thing that helped me a lot was the documentation and the videos available, mostly the Udemy course.

Many great features that simplify the day to day like of an automation engineer, from test design, to implementation, reporting and root cause analysis.

Uri U

VP Engineering

What it tries to accomplish is wonderful, and the ease of use could potentially save my QA team a lot of time.

The problem is that mabl cant find the field, button, or part of the page that was selected in the test creation and simply stop running, no error, nothing.

Ryan R

Software Development Manageer

I love the ability to capture journeys with the Trainer... it's a brilliant tool that makes setup incredibly fast.

Replay on first try does not work. Do not know how to fix the replay when it is broken, No easy way to fix the broken test.

You can see that the product will make things easier for customers. The look and feel of Mabl seemed pretty modern which is important because it makes it seem like it has great support.

The problem is that the tool will log its self out and then pass the remaining tests.

I like that a number of tests start running right away when you add a new app. I like the customer service, they are professional, friendly and helpful.

Many of the broken links were found. Again, there were no info about response time, request timeout duration, number of attempts made to open the links and status codes received.