How to Choose Between Manual and Automated Testing?

As a Quality Assurance Manager, you’re constantly testing websites or programs during the process of building and also after the launch. In this review of manual and automation testing methods of testing, we hope to help you make more informed choices about which one you should choose. The trend is currently getting more automated, and that applies to software and web testing too.

 

However, when is it better to utilize automated testing over the manual method of testing? Do you think a manual is the best option for certain situations? Let’s have a look.

 

All You Should Know About Automated Testing

Automated testing happens when you as well as the members of your Quality Assurance team use scripted tests that are prewritten and run in a controlled manner.

 

If you run the test in an automated manner, it evaluates the actual results versus what you expected to see. This will give you an indication of whether the software or application performs as you expect it to.

 

One of the greatest advantages of automatized testing is the fact that it is able to simulate the tasks your QA team does on a regular basis. The computer is never bored of performing a routine.

 

The process of testing each component of your digital item regularly will allow for faster creation of high-quality websites, software, and products.

All You Should Know About Manual Testing 

In this procedure, software testers and quality control experts run the test cases and then create the test reports on their own.

 

Therefore, manual testing is usually carried out by an experienced tester to carry out the software testing procedure.

 

The good thing is that your testers don’t require coding expertise for manual testing. Even with all the tools available for automation testing, manual should not be ignored.

 

In reality, you need to run tests manually before you can install and run automated tests.

 

Automation isn’t possible without a solid foundation based on initial manual testing. Manual testing takes more time and effort at first but it could be a benefit in the long run.

 

The primary benefit of manual testing is the fact that it permits realistic testing scenarios typically based on instructions that are provided in test scenarios.

 

This gives you the chance to find bugs or reveal problems that automated tests cannot detect and filter.

 

Manual Vs. Automated Testing: Which One Is Best For You?

I) Time Consumption and Costs to the company

If the amount of content is substantial and the testing phase is running for a significant amount of duration, automated testing is the best option due to the fact that

 

• It also reduces the number of resources needed.
• Multiple types of similar test scenarios can be run simultaneously using the same script.
• If the project is large the estimated budget should be sufficient to fund the installation and ongoing maintenance of an automated tool for testing.

 

In smaller projects, where the testing phase lasts just a few weeks, manual testing is preferred due to the fact that

 

• Resources don’t have enough time to train on these tools and begin testing.
• Maintenance and installation can be time-consuming and expensive.
• There is less need for the simultaneous execution of several test cases with similar characteristics.

 

II) Tests to Assess User Acceptance

Automated testing to determine the responsiveness of users’ interfaces of apps is well-known and appreciated. However, it’s not intended to serve as a tool or a way to improve your UI test capabilities. 

 

Automated testing tools for UI work by examining the position of the element, its alignment, and the distance between elements and their container. A small mistake in the test script could cause one of these alignments to be wrongly identified.

 

In the course of the process of user acceptance testing, the ability of manual testers is vital. An experienced tester can spot any item or component that is not aligned properly or does not match the specifications.

 

III) Accuracy of Results

In a test phase whose duration is lengthy, it is likely to be the case of an unnoticed error occurring when testing is done by hand. Each time a minor defect is repaired, the whole software must be checked to make sure that there is no other issue not happening. It is exhausting and repetitive, and testers frequently overlook tiny but crucial flaws while running tests over and over again.

 

Automated testing involves using scripts that test the program repeatedly. Because the machine doesn’t become boring If the script is written correctly there is no possibility of overlooking a problem during the testing process repeatedly.

 

IV) Regression Testing

Testing for regression is a process that involves constant code changes to test how a program responds to frequent changes. If regression testing is done by hand

 

There is a high chance of error because human eyes are often unable to detect subtle changes in the same thing over and over again.

If it is a huge application, it will require several testers to carry out the repetitive work.

 

When testing using automation is performed

 

• Regression testing tools accelerate the process by repeating the testing of cases.
• Multiple scenarios for testing can be run simultaneously.
• It saves time by running performing parallel execution in conjunction with other tests.

 

V) The Nature of the Application

In addition to the degree of complexity of the application as well as the time to complete the project, the character of the software also determines which kind of test is the best way to test it.

 

In the case of banking applications, there are a variety of scenarios that need to be tested. Like,

 

• Validation during user login.
• Security protocols during banking operations.
• Testing for suspicious activities during transactions.

 

In these types of situations, testing can be completed quicker when a properly written script is run. Since the majority of tests involve repetitive actions of the same scenario, but with distinct types of entities. Thus the manual method is superior.

 

If you are developing a web-based application for a small size such as a personal blog or the site of a small company like an eatery, the design and the feel of your app and the user experience are essential. 

 

When testing is required, it should be carried out in accordance with human nature. The tester must think from the viewpoint of the end-user and test the application to identify the bugs or flaws that can affect the user experience. 

 

Since there are no automated testing tools have yet developed that could replace human intuition, manual testing is the best option in this situation.

 

How LambdaTest Proves To Be Best For Testing?

The best thing is that you can perform automated cross-browsing testing with the help of Selenium scripts on 3000+ browsers and OS environments. It provides you with higher test coverage and less built times. 

 

With the help of LambdaTest, you can evaluate how well your web app renders when accessed through different browsers. 

 

You can automate cross-browser tests of your web pages hosted locally by using the LambdaTest tunnel. It is also possible to run tests across several browser/OS configurations at once.

 

Conclusion 

For an efficient engineering team to create amazing websites and apps, finding the appropriate balance between manual and automated testing is crucial. This allows for rapid delivery of bug-free sites and apps while reducing costs.

 

It is crucial to plan out what types of tests are going to be performed by hand and which ones are automated. In addition, capacity planning is essential for manual testing, i.e. the number of testers as well as the need for automated testing, i.e. the amount of users and parallels must be calculated. So, the most effective solution that maximizes speed, coverage as well as costs.